Message ID | 20210414171349.2472165-1-stefansf@linux.ibm.com |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
Series | re PR tree-optimization/93210 (Sub-optimal code optimization on struct/combound constexpr (gcc vs. clang)) | expand |
On 4/14/2021 11:13 AM, Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus via Gcc-patches wrote: > 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. > > Ok for mainline? OK jeff
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;