On Tue, Jan 6, 2026 at 9:38 AM Rainer Orth <[email protected]> wrote: > > Two tests currently XPASS on 64-bit Solaris/SPARC: > > XPASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr33804.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1 loops" 1 > XPASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr33804.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorizing stmts > using SLP" 1 > > XPASS: gcc.dg/vect/slp-multitypes-3.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1 > loops" 1 > XPASS: gcc.dg/vect/slp-multitypes-3.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorizing > stmts using SLP" 2 > > Both tests are currently xfail'ed on sparc*-*-*. The following patch > restricts that to 32-bit SPARC instead. > > Tested on sparc-sun-solaris2.11 and i386-pc-solaris2.11. > > Ok for trunk?
OK. > However, I wonder if there shouldn't be some effective-target keyword for > this difference instead of the target-specific xfail (probably not worth > it) or if restricing the xfail like this is just a hack. What's the actual difference here? I expect we use versioning for alignment, so the effective target requirement on pr33804 looks bogus to me. Is it that we lack VnQImode addition support? (with n a multiple of 4) What's the difference in behavior of 32bit vs 64bit sparc? Richard. > -- > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University > > > 2026-01-05 Rainer Orth <[email protected]> > > gcc/testsuite: > PR tree-optimization/102954 > * gcc.dg/vect/pr33804.c (scan-tree-dump-times): Only > xfail on 32-bit SPARC. > * gcc.dg/vect/slp-multitypes-3.c: Likewise. >
