https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117476
--- Comment #25 from Alexey Merzlyakov <alexey.merzlyakov at samsung dot com> --- Updates on GCC regression testing: Locally checked the GCC make check with enable-languages=all before the patching vs. r15-4991-g69bd93c167fefb + fix we are discussing in this ticket. Testing was performed natively on x86_64 and in cross-toolchain targeted for aarch64, riscv64 and mips32 under qemu-user simulation. The results are as follows: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ component x86_64 aarch64 riscv64 mips32 gcc.sum No regrs No regrs No regs No regs gfortran.sum No regrs No regrs No regs No regs gm2.sum No regrs No regrs No regs No regs go.sum No regrs No regrs No regs No regs gotools.sum No regrs Skip Skip Skip g++.sum No regrs No regrs No regs No regs libatomic.sum No regrs No regrs No regs No regs libffi.sum No regrs No regrs No regrs No regs libgomp.sum No regrs Skip Skip Skip libgo.sum No regrs Skip Skip Skip libitm.sum No regrs No regrs No regrs Skip libstdc++.sum No regrs No regrs No regrs No regrs obj-c++.sum No regrs No regrs No regrs No regrs objc.sum No regrs No regrs No regrs No regrs ------------------------------------------------------------------------ In this testing: * No regressions were detected on the above architectures * "image*" tests from libgo are confirmed to pass with latest fix on x86_64 (on other architectures GCC failed to compile testsuite in cross-mode) * Some thread-specific tests (like g++.dg/asan/deep-thread-stack-1.C or g++.dg/tls/thread_local4g.C) were detected to behave flaky on both: w/o r15-4991-g69bd93c167fefb patch and (patch + fix) cases. So, there is most likely not to be treated as regression. My apologies for long reply, testing took some time to check both cases and gather the results.
