On 9/1/23 04:20, Christoph Muellner wrote:
From: Christoph Müllner <christoph.muell...@vrull.eu>
Recently, these xtheadcondmov tests regressed with -Oz:
* FAIL: gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-mveqz-imm-eqz.c
* FAIL: gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-mveqz-imm-not.c
* FAIL: gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-mvnez-imm-cond.c
* FAIL: gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-mvnez-imm-nez.c
As -Oz stands for "Optimize aggressively for size rather than speed.",
we need to inspect the generated code, which looks like this:
-Oz
0000000000000000 <not_int_int>:
0: e199 bnez a1,6 <.L2>
2: 40100513 li a0,1025
0000000000000006 <.L2>:
6: 8082 ret
-O2:
0000000000000000 <not_int_int>:
0: 40100793 li a5,1025
4: 40b7950b th.mveqz a0,a5,a1
8: 8082 ret
As the generated code with -Oz consumes less size, there is nothing
wrong in the code generation. Instead, let's not run the xtheadcondmov
tests with -Oz.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Müllner <christoph.muell...@vrull.eu>
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-mveqz-imm-eqz.c: Disable for -Oz.
* gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-mveqz-imm-not.c: Likewise.
* gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-mveqz-reg-eqz.c: Likewise.
* gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-mveqz-reg-not.c: Likewise.
* gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-mvnez-imm-cond.c: Likewise.
* gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-mvnez-imm-nez.c: Likewise.
* gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-mvnez-reg-cond.c: Likewise.
* gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-mvnez-reg-nez.c: Likewise.
OK
jeff
