On Thu, 2023-06-29 at 16:01 -0400, Marek Polacek via Gcc-patches wrote: > These tests fail when the testsuite is executed with -fstack- > protector-strong. > To avoid this, this patch adds -fno-stack-protector to dg-options. > > Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
LGTM, we've noticed these two failures in Linux From Scratch [1]. But this is not an approval because I'm not a maintainer. [1]:https://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/development/chapter08/gcc.html > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > > * gcc.target/i386/pr104610.c: Use -fno-stack-protector. > * gcc.target/i386/pr69482-1.c: Likewise. > --- > gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr104610.c | 2 +- > gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr69482-1.c | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr104610.c > b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr104610.c > index fe39cbe5b8a..5173fc8898c 100644 > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr104610.c > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr104610.c > @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ > /* { dg-do compile } */ > -/* { dg-options "-O2 -mavx -mmove-max=256 -mstore-max=256" } */ > +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mavx -mmove-max=256 -mstore-max=256 -fno-stack- > protector" } */ > /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {(?n)vptest.*ymm} 1 } } */ > /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {sete} 1 } } */ > /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not {(?n)je.*L[0-9]} } } */ > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr69482-1.c > b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr69482-1.c > index f192261b104..99bb6ad5a37 100644 > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr69482-1.c > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr69482-1.c > @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ > /* { dg-do compile } */ > -/* { dg-options "-O3" } */ > +/* { dg-options "-O3 -fno-stack-protector" } */ > > static inline void memset_s(void* s, int n) { > volatile unsigned char * p = s; > > base-commit: 070a6bf0bdc6761ad77ac97404c98f00a7007d54 -- Xi Ruoyao <xry...@xry111.site> School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University
