Hi, This patch fixes arm/atomic-op-consume.c test to expect safe "LDAEX" instruction to be generated when __ATOMIC_CONSUME semantics is requested.
This patch was tested by running the modified test on arm-none-eabi and arm-none-linux-gnueabi compilers. Is this patch ok? Alex 2015-01-27 Alex Velenko <alex.vele...@arm.com> gcc/testsuite/ * gcc.target/arm/atomic-op-consume.c (scan-assember-times): Adjust scan-assembler-times pattern. diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/atomic-op-consume.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/atomic-op-consume.c index 0354717..cc6c028 100644 --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/atomic-op-consume.c +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/atomic-op-consume.c @@ -5,6 +5,9 @@ #include "../aarch64/atomic-op-consume.x" -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldrex\tr\[0-9\]+, \\\[r\[0-9\]+\\\]" 6 } } */ +/* To workaround Bugzilla 59448 issue, a request for __ATOMIC_CONSUME is always + promoted to __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE, implemented as MEMMODEL_ACQUIRE. This causes + "LDAEX" to be generated instead of "LDREX". */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldaex\tr\[0-9\]+, \\\[r\[0-9\]+\\\]" 6 } } */ /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "strex\t...?, r\[0-9\]+, \\\[r\[0-9\]+\\\]" 6 } } */ /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "dmb" } } */