[gcc r11-8002] testsuite: Fix up pr96573.c on aarch64 [PR96573]

[gcc r11-8002] testsuite: Fix up pr96573.c on aarch64 [PR96573]

[Jakub Jelinek]

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bfeb36bd03c2168af263daa13370a20a96c42b5d

commit r11-8002-gbfeb36bd03c2168af263daa13370a20a96c42b5d
Author: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue Apr 6 12:44:51 2021 +0200

    testsuite: Fix up pr96573.c on aarch64 [PR96573]
    
    On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 02:16:55PM +0100, Alex Coplan via Gcc-patches wrote:
    > FYI, I'm seeing the new test failing on aarch64:
    >
    > PASS: gcc.dg/pr96573.c (test for excess errors)
    > FAIL: gcc.dg/pr96573.c scan-tree-dump optimized "__builtin_bswap"
    
    The vectorizer in the aarch64 case manages to emit a VEC_PERM_EXPR instead
    (which is just as efficient).
    
    So, do we want to go for the following (and/or perhaps also restrict the test to
    a couple of targets where it works?  In my last distro build it failed only
    on aarch64-linux, while armv7hl-linux-gnueabi and
    {i686,x86_64,powerpc64le,s390x}-linux were fine)?
    
    2021-04-06  Jakub Jelinek  <jakub@redhat.com>
    
            PR tree-optimization/96573
            * gcc.dg/pr96573.c: Instead of __builtin_bswap accept also
            VEC_PERM_EXPR with bswapping permutation.

Diff:
---
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr96573.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr96573.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr96573.c
index 3acf117f063..63db69df029 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr96573.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr96573.c
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 /* { dg-do compile { target { lp64 || ilp32 } } } */
 /* { dg-require-effective-target bswap } */
 /* { dg-options "-O3 -fdump-tree-optimized" } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump "__builtin_bswap" "optimized" } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump "__builtin_bswap\|VEC_PERM_EXPR\[^\n\r]*7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 0" "optimized" } } */
 
 typedef __SIZE_TYPE__ size_t;