gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* gcc.dg/vect/pr56541.c: Add vect_floatint_cvt.
OK. I'd tend to use XFAIL for a compiler bug that we haven't fixed. In
this case the target doesn't support what the test is trying to do. So
skipping the test in one manner or another seems better.
Just realized I seem to have have committed the only option that is
definitely wrong... Probably got confused because of switching back and
forth between the two correct alternatives too often. Therefore I will
be committing
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr56541.c
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr56541.c
index e1cee6d0b0e..fa86142716b 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr56541.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr56541.c
@@ -24,4 +24,4 @@ void foo()
}
}
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 1 loops" 1 "vect" {
target { ! vect_floatint_cvt } xfail { ! vect_cond_mixed } } } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 1 loops" 1 "vect" {
target { vect_floatint_cvt } xfail { ! vect_cond_mixed } } } } */
as obvious (the target should support vect_floatint_cvt for the test).
Regards
Robin
--
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* gcc.dg/vect/pr56541.c: Do not skip vect_cond_mixed.
