On Thu, 4 Aug 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > On 3 August 2016 at 17:27, Matthew Wahab <matthew.wa...@foss.arm.com> wrote: > > On 29/07/16 15:32, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > >> > >> On 29 July 2016 at 12:42, Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de> wrote: > >>> > >>> On Fri, 29 Jul 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > >>> > >>>> On 28 July 2016 at 19:18, Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> On Thu, 28 Jul 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> On 28 July 2016 at 15:58, Andreas Schwab <sch...@suse.de> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Mo, Jul 25 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni > >>>>>>> <prathamesh.kulka...@linaro.org> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr70920-4.c > >>>>>>>> b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr70920-4.c > >>>>>>>> new file mode 100644 > >>>>>>>> index 0000000..dedb895 > >>>>>>>> --- /dev/null > >>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr70920-4.c > >>>>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@ > >>>>>>>> +/* { dg-do compile } */ > >>>>>>>> +/* { dg-options "-O2 -fdump-tree-ccp-details > >>>>>>>> -Wno-int-to-pointer-cast" } */ > >>>>>>>> + > >>>>>>>> +#include <stdint.h> > >>>>>>>> + > >>>>>>>> +void f1(); > >>>>>>>> +void f2(); > >>>>>>>> + > >>>>>>>> +void > >>>>>>>> +foo (int a) > >>>>>>>> +{ > >>>>>>>> + void *cst = 0; > >>>>>>>> + if ((int *) a == cst) > >>>>>>>> + { > >>>>>>>> + f1 (); > >>>>>>>> + if (a) > >>>>>>>> + f2 (); > >>>>>>>> + } > >>>>>>>> +} > >>>>>>>> + > >>>>>>>> +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump "gimple_simplified to if > >>>>>>>> \\(_\[0-9\]* == 0\\)" "ccp1" } } */ > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> This fails on all ilp32 platforms. > > > > [..] > >>> > >>> > >>> I don't think just matching == 0 is a good idea. I suggest to > >>> restrict the testcase to lp64 targets and maybe add a ilp32 variant. > >> > >> Hi, > >> I restricted the test-case to lp64 targets. > >> Is this OK to commit ? > > > > > > Hello, > > > > The test case is failing for arm-none-linux-gnueabihf. > Oops, sorry about that. > > > > It is correctly skipped if the 'dg-require-effective-target lp64' you added > > is moved to the end of the directives (after the dg-options). > Indeed, it is skipped after moving to end. > Is it OK to commit the attached patch ?
I believe the canonical place is after do-do but before dg-options. Can you check if that works, too? Richard. > Thanks, > Prathamesh > > > > Matthew > > > -- Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de> SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nuernberg)