[PATCH] testsuite: i386: Fix gcc.target/i386/pr95798-?.c on Solaris

[PATCH] testsuite: i386: Fix gcc.target/i386/pr95798-?.c on Solaris

[Rainer Orth]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1790 bytes --]

The new gcc.target/i386/pr95798-?.c tests FAIL on 64-bit Solaris/x86:

+FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-1.c scan-assembler 1, 8\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)
+FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-1.c scan-assembler 2, 16\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)
+FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-1.c scan-assembler 3, 24\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)
+FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-1.c scan-assembler 4, 32\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)
+FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-1.c scan-assembler 5, 40\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)
+FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-1.c scan-assembler 6, 48\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)
+FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-1.c scan-assembler 7, 56\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)
+FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-2.c scan-assembler 1, 8\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)
+FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-2.c scan-assembler 2, 16\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)
+FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-2.c scan-assembler 3, 24\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)
+FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-2.c scan-assembler 4, 32\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)
+FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-2.c scan-assembler 5, 40\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)
+FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-2.c scan-assembler 6, 48\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)
+FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-2.c scan-assembler 7, 56\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)

This happens because Solaris/amd64 defaults to -fno-omit-frame-pointer
and can be avoided by always passing -fomit-frame-pointer.

Tested on i386-pc-solaris2.11 and x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.

Ok for master?

	Rainer

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University


2021-03-02  Rainer Orth  <ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>

	gcc/testsuite:
	* gcc.target/i386/pr95798-1.c: Add -fomit-frame-pointer to
	dg-options.
	* gcc.target/i386/pr95798-2.c: Likewise.


[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: solx64-testsuite-pr95798.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 1383 bytes --]

# HG changeset patch
# Parent  bedda525d3ac004d2d10680b74fcadf8324f1b5c
testsuite: i386: Fix gcc.target/i386/pr95798-?.c on Solaris

diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr95798-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr95798-1.c
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr95798-1.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr95798-1.c
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 /* PR target/95798 */
 /* { dg-do compile } */
-/* { dg-options "-O2 -masm=att" } */
+/* { dg-options "-O2 -masm=att -fomit-frame-pointer" } */
 /* { dg-final { scan-assembler "1, 8\\\(%rsp,%r\[a-z0-9]*,8\\\)" { target lp64 } } } */
 /* { dg-final { scan-assembler "2, 16\\\(%rsp,%r\[a-z0-9]*,8\\\)" { target lp64 } } } */
 /* { dg-final { scan-assembler "3, 24\\\(%rsp,%r\[a-z0-9]*,8\\\)" { target lp64 } } } */
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr95798-2.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr95798-2.c
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr95798-2.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr95798-2.c
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 /* PR target/95798 */
 /* { dg-do compile } */
-/* { dg-options "-O2 -masm=att" } */
+/* { dg-options "-O2 -masm=att -fomit-frame-pointer" } */
 /* { dg-final { scan-assembler "1, 8\\\(%rsp,%r\[a-z0-9]*,8\\\)" { target lp64 } } } */
 /* { dg-final { scan-assembler "2, 16\\\(%rsp,%r\[a-z0-9]*,8\\\)" { target lp64 } } } */
 /* { dg-final { scan-assembler "3, 24\\\(%rsp,%r\[a-z0-9]*,8\\\)" { target lp64 } } } */

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: i386: Fix gcc.target/i386/pr95798-?.c on Solaris

[Jakub Jelinek]

On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 01:36:20PM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote:
> The new gcc.target/i386/pr95798-?.c tests FAIL on 64-bit Solaris/x86:
> 
> +FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-1.c scan-assembler 1, 8\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)
> +FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-1.c scan-assembler 2, 16\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)
> +FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-1.c scan-assembler 3, 24\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)
> +FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-1.c scan-assembler 4, 32\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)
> +FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-1.c scan-assembler 5, 40\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)
> +FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-1.c scan-assembler 6, 48\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)
> +FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-1.c scan-assembler 7, 56\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)
> +FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-2.c scan-assembler 1, 8\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)
> +FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-2.c scan-assembler 2, 16\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)
> +FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-2.c scan-assembler 3, 24\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)
> +FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-2.c scan-assembler 4, 32\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)
> +FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-2.c scan-assembler 5, 40\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)
> +FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-2.c scan-assembler 6, 48\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)
> +FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr95798-2.c scan-assembler 7, 56\\\\(%rsp,%r[a-z0-9]*,8\\\\)
> 
> This happens because Solaris/amd64 defaults to -fno-omit-frame-pointer
> and can be avoided by always passing -fomit-frame-pointer.
> 
> Tested on i386-pc-solaris2.11 and x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
> 
> Ok for master?

Ok, thanks.

> 2021-03-02  Rainer Orth  <ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>
> 
> 	gcc/testsuite:
> 	* gcc.target/i386/pr95798-1.c: Add -fomit-frame-pointer to
> 	dg-options.
> 	* gcc.target/i386/pr95798-2.c: Likewise.

	Jakub