Hans-Peter Nilsson <h...@axis.com> writes: > v2: oops, typo: component is tree-optimization, not tree-ssa. > Resent for the benefit of autotesters that don't yet > understand natural language. > > Forcing a fail and marking as xfail is IMHO better than > passing --param=logical-op-non-short-circuit=0 or #pragma
"better than ...=1", right? > GCC unroll, making the test pass. To wit, this makes it > observable when it's fixed. > > Ok to commit? > -- >8 -- > This is expected fallout from r15-5646-gd1cf0d7a0f27fd as > described by that commit. > > PR tree-optimization/117954 > * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr111456-1.c: Xfail and pass > --param=logical-op-non-short-circuit=0. > --- > gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr111456-1.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr111456-1.c > b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr111456-1.c > index ffff664a1afa..24984cd6c6b7 100644 > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr111456-1.c > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr111456-1.c > @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ > /* { dg-do compile } */ > -/* { dg-options "-O2 -fdump-tree-optimized" } */ > +/* { dg-options "-O2 -fdump-tree-optimized --param > logical-op-non-short-circuit=0" } */ > /* PR tree-optimization/111456 */ > > void foo(void); > @@ -38,6 +38,6 @@ static signed char k(signed char m, short n) { > int main() { k(0 <= 0 > *j, i); } > > > -/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-not "foo " "optimized" } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-not "foo " "optimized" { xfail *-*-* } } } */ > /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump "return 0;" "optimized" } } */