On 19/01/15 08:53, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 8:18 AM, Mike Stump <mikest...@comcast.net> wrote:
On Jan 14, 2015, at 3:50 AM, Tejas Belagod <tejas.bela...@arm.com> wrote:
As agreed here (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63971), please can
I reverse Andrew's patch
out(https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-11/msg02916.html)?
Ok.
Unless someone objects to a reversion like this, when the author of a patch
says it should be reverted… that’s all the approval it needs, though, people
can always ask for a review for any reason they want.
And now this reversal needs to be reverted. Because the conditional
compare optimization went back in. I figured the optimization would
go back in and that is why I did not act on reverting my patch that
fast. The conditional compare patch went in a day after this reversal
went in ;).
Yes, now committed r219838 as obvious.
Thanks,
Tejas.
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_1.c
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_1.c
index 5b3c0ab..b270bae 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_1.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_1.c
@@ -14,6 +14,6 @@ t_frame_pattern (test1, 200, )
t_frame_run (test1)
/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "str\tx30, \\\[sp, -\[0-9\]+\\\]!" 2 } }
*/
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldr\tx30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 3 } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldr\tx30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 2 } } */
/* { dg-final { cleanup-saved-temps } } */
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_2.c
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_2.c
index 6ec4088..59a089c 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_2.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_2.c
@@ -15,6 +15,6 @@ t_frame_run (test2)
/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "stp\tx19, x30, \\\[sp, -\[0-9\]+\\\]!" 1
} } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldp\tx19, x30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 2 }
} */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldp\tx19, x30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 1 }
} */
/* { dg-final { cleanup-saved-temps } } */
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_4.c
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_4.c
index ebfb290..d717862 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_4.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_4.c
@@ -14,6 +14,6 @@ t_frame_pattern (test4, 400, "x19")
t_frame_run (test4)
/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "stp\tx19, x30, \\\[sp, -\[0-9\]+\\\]!" 1
} } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldp\tx19, x30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 2 }
} */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldp\tx19, x30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 1 }
} */
/* { dg-final { cleanup-saved-temps } } */
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_6.c
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_6.c
index b5ea7ee..b66ce09 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_6.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_6.c
@@ -15,6 +15,6 @@ t_frame_pattern (test6, 700, )
t_frame_run (test6)
/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "str\tx30, \\\[sp, -\[0-9\]+\\\]!" 2 } }
*/
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldr\tx30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 3 } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldr\tx30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 2 } } */
/* { dg-final { cleanup-saved-temps } } */
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_7.c
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_7.c
index daa1f42..22576c4 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_7.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_7.c
@@ -15,6 +15,6 @@ t_frame_pattern (test7, 700, "x19")
t_frame_run (test7)
/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "stp\tx19, x30, \\\[sp, -\[0-9\]+\\\]!" 1
} } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldp\tx19, x30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 2 }
} */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldp\tx19, x30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 1 }
} */
/* { dg-final { cleanup-saved-temps } } */
