See PR99212. Now, cris-elf isn't the only target for which this line shows a failure; pru-unknown-elf and m68k-unknown-linux-gnu are two others. I'll leave adjustments to the respective maintainers, but trivially appending more triplets should work: no extra bracketing needed. A specific effective_target specifier would as always be perferable, but I couldn't without accountable effort find out what was the common factor.
Besides cris-elf, sanity-checked for native x86_64-*-linux*. gcc/testsuite: PR analyzer/99212 * gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test_45): Inverse xfail at line 971 for cris-*-*. --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c index afd155694600..c0f54637693c 100644 --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c @@ -968,8 +968,8 @@ void test_45 (void) { struct ubits bits; bits.b0 = 1; - __analyzer_eval (bits.b0 == 1); /* { dg-warning "TRUE" "desired" { xfail *-*-* } } */ - /* { dg-warning "UNKNOWN" "status quo" { target *-*-* } .-1 } */ + __analyzer_eval (bits.b0 == 1); /* { dg-warning "TRUE" "desired, PR99212" { xfail { ! { cris-*-* } } } } */ + /* { dg-warning "UNKNOWN" "status quo, PR99212" { target { *-*-* } xfail { cris-*-* } } .-1 } */ // TODO(xfail): ^^^^ bits.b456 = 5; -- 2.11.0