Hi,
after checking in the 'postpone expanding va_arg till pass_stdarg' patch series,
some scans related to function f15 in gcc.dg/tree-ssa/stdarg-2.c have started
failing.
[ The committed patch series contained a modification of stdarg-2.c, but that
seems to be not complete and not correct. ]
F.i., for s390 we find at
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2015-05/msg00507.html:
...
FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/stdarg-2.c scan-tree-dump stdarg f15: va_list escapes 0,
needs to save 1 GPR units and 2 FPR units
...
Furthermore, at https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64950#c11 it was
noted that:
...
Unfortunately, the gcc.dg/tree-ssa/stdarg-2.c part of the patch is wrong: the
test now FAILs on i686-unknown-linux-gnu, i686-apple-darwin, and i386-pc-solaris
with -m64: both dumps (i.e. -m32 and -m64) contain
m32/stdarg-2.c.084t.stdarg:f15: va_list escapes 1, needs to save all GPR units
and all FPR units.
m64/stdarg-2.c.084t.stdarg:f15: va_list escapes 1, needs to save all GPR units
and all FPR units.
...
I've filed two PRs:
- PR66010 '[6 Regression] Missed optimization after inlining va_list parameter'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66010
- PR66013 'Missed optimization after inlining va_list parameter, -m32 case'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66013
to track these errors.
AFAIU now from the investigations in those PRs, we can expect all f15 scans that
check for the presence of 'va_list escapes 0' to fail.
I'd like to commit two patches.
- The first patch undoes the modification of stdarg-2.c as committed in the
original patch series (omitted).
- The second patch adds appropriate xfails (attached).
OK for trunk?
Thanks,
- Tom
[PATCH 2/2] Xfail gcc.dg/tree-ssa/stdarg-2.c f15 scans
2015-05-05 Tom de Vries t...@codesourcery.com
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/stdarg-2.c: Xfail f15 scans which test for presence of
'va_list escapes 0'.
---
gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/stdarg-2.c | 14 +++---
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/stdarg-2.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/stdarg-2.c
index fe39da3..f09b5de 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/stdarg-2.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/stdarg-2.c
@@ -288,10 +288,18 @@ f15 (int i, ...)
f15_1 (ap);
va_end (ap);
}
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump f15: va_list escapes 0, needs to save \[148\] GPR units and \[1-9\]\[0-9\]* FPR units stdarg { target { { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } { ! { ia32 || llp64 } } } } } } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump f15: va_list escapes 0, needs to save \[148\] GPR units and \[1-9\]\[0-9\]* FPR units stdarg { target { powerpc*-*-linux* { powerpc_fprs ilp32 } } } } } */
+
+/* Following three dg-finals are marked as xfail due to PR66010/PR66013. */
+/* Was: { target { { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } { ! { ia32 || llp64 } } } }. */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump f15: va_list escapes 0, needs to save \[148\] GPR units and \[1-9\]\[0-9\]* FPR units stdarg { xfail *-*-* } } } */
+/* Was: { target { powerpc*-*-linux* { powerpc_fprs ilp32 } } }. */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump f15: va_list escapes 0, needs to save \[148\] GPR units and \[1-9\]\[0-9\]* FPR units stdarg { xfail *-*-* } } } */
+/* Was: { target s390*-*-linux* }. */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump f15: va_list escapes 0, needs to save 1 GPR units and 2 FPR units stdarg { xfail *-*-* } } } */
+
+/* We may be able to improve upon this after fixing PR66010/PR66013. */
/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump f15: va_list escapes 1, needs to save all GPR units and all FPR units stdarg { target alpha*-*-linux* } } } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump f15: va_list escapes 0, needs to save 1 GPR units and 2 FPR units stdarg { target s390*-*-linux* } } } */
+
/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-not f15: va_list escapes 0, needs to save 0 GPR units stdarg { target { { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } ia32 } } } } */
/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-not f15: va_list escapes 0, needs to save 0 GPR units stdarg { target ia64-*-* } } } */
/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-not f15: va_list escapes 0, needs to save 0 GPR units stdarg { target { powerpc*-*-* lp64 } } } } */
--
1.9.1
