[gcc(refs/vendors/riscv/heads/gcc-13-with-riscv-opts)] RISC-V: Make arch-24.c to test "success" case

[gcc(refs/vendors/riscv/heads/gcc-13-with-riscv-opts)] RISC-V: Make arch-24.c to test "success" case

[Jeff Law]

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e8ec9036ff83010bb48e02e3b46e52acef33de9c

commit e8ec9036ff83010bb48e02e3b46e52acef33de9c
Author: Tsukasa OI <research_trasio@irq.a4lg.com>
Date:   Tue Aug 29 02:41:44 2023 +0000

    RISC-V: Make arch-24.c to test "success" case
    
    arch-24.c and arch-25.c are exactly the same and redundant.  The author
    suspects that the original author intended to test two base ISAs (RV32I and
    RV64I) so this commit changes arch-24.c to test that RV32I+Zcf does not
    cause any errors.
    
    gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
    
            * gcc.target/riscv/arch-24.c: Test RV32I+Zcf instead.
    
    (cherry picked from commit a248e1cc860821b96a42be96478257c4964a7c2a)

Diff:
---
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/arch-24.c | 4 +---
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/arch-24.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/arch-24.c
index 3be4ade65a77..af15c3234b5e 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/arch-24.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/arch-24.c
@@ -1,5 +1,3 @@
 /* { dg-do compile } */
-/* { dg-options "-march=rv64i_zcf -mabi=lp64" } */
+/* { dg-options "-march=rv32i_zcf -mabi=ilp32" } */
 int foo() {}
-/* { dg-error "'-march=rv64i_zcf': zcf extension supports in rv32 only" "" { target *-*-* } 0 } */
-/* { dg-error "'-march=rv64i_zca_zcf': zcf extension supports in rv32 only" "" { target *-*-* } 0 } */