> Hi Marcus, > > On fsf-4.9 I see the test pass: > > PASS: gcc.target/arm/pr43920-2.c (test for excess errors) > PASS: gcc.target/arm/pr43920-2.c scan-assembler-times pop 2 > PASS: gcc.target/arm/pr43920-2.c scan-assembler-times beq 3 > Executing on host: arm-none-eabi-size pr43920-2.o (timeout = 300) > spawn arm-none-eabi-size pr43920-2.o > text data bss dec hex filename > 54 0 0 54 36 pr43920-2.o > text size is 54 > PASS: gcc.target/arm/pr43920-2.c object-size text <= 54 > > So this is a regression in fsf-5.
Sorry about the terse email earlier - don't know what thunderbird did with me and I was running off on an urgent private errand. https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64916#c3 suggests that this test case worked by fluke in earlier versions of the compiler, and the debate has been whether this is a regression or not. If in case it is not deemed to be a regression based on that comment, we should just XFAIL the test and move on. Given Jakub's away I'm CCing richi on this discussion. regards Ramana > > Kind regards, > Alex >
