[gcc r11-8186] re PR tree-optimization/93210 (Sub-optimal code optimization on struct/combound constexpr (gcc vs. c

[Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus <stefansf@gcc.gnu.org>]

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:417c36cfd620bf2b047852c2aa9ac49004aed2bc

commit r11-8186-g417c36cfd620bf2b047852c2aa9ac49004aed2bc
Author: Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus <stefansf@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Thu Apr 15 08:03:47 2021 +0200

    re PR tree-optimization/93210 (Sub-optimal code optimization on struct/combound constexpr (gcc vs. clang))
    
    Regarding test gcc.dg/pr93210.c, on different targets GIMPLE code may
    slightly differ which is why the scan-tree-dump-times directive may
    fail.  For example, for a RETURN_EXPR on x86_64 we have
    
      return 0x11100f0e0d0c0a090807060504030201;
    
    whereas on IBM Z the first operand is a RESULT_DECL like
    
      <retval> = 0x102030405060708090a0c0d0e0f1011;
      return <retval>;
    
    gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
    
            * gcc.dg/pr93210.c: Adapt regex in order to also support a
            RESULT_DECL as an operand for a RETURN_EXPR.

Diff:
---
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr93210.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr93210.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr93210.c
index ec4194b6b49..134d32bc505 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr93210.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr93210.c
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 /* PR tree-optimization/93210 */
 /* { dg-do run } */
 /* { dg-options "-O2 -fdump-tree-optimized" } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "return \[0-9]\[0-9a-fA-FxX]*;" 31 "optimized" } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "(?:return|<retval> =) \[0-9]\[0-9a-fA-FxX]*;" 31 "optimized" } } */
 
 #ifdef __SIZEOF_INT128__
 typedef unsigned __int128 L;