https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7fb1d7bff18d318de00021765e1e12b0d56e7ac1
commit r14-11379-g7fb1d7bff18d318de00021765e1e12b0d56e7ac1
Author: Richard Earnshaw <rearn...@arm.com>
Date: Mon Mar 3 15:30:58 2025 +0000
arm: xfail gcc.target/arm/unsigned-extend-1.c for thumb1
Partial backport of 2a502f9e4c5c6a8e908ef1b0b5c03fb2e4bd4390.
gcc/testsuite:
* gcc.target/arm/unsigned-extend-1.c: Expand check for any
insn suggesting a zero-extend. XFAIL for thumb1 code.
Signed-off-by: Torbjörn SVENSSON <torbjorn.svens...@foss.st.com>
Diff:
---
gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/unsigned-extend-1.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/unsigned-extend-1.c
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/unsigned-extend-1.c
index 3b4ab048fb09..fa3d34400bfa 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/unsigned-extend-1.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/unsigned-extend-1.c
@@ -5,5 +5,5 @@ unsigned char foo (unsigned char c)
{
return (c >= '0') && (c <= '9');
}
-
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "uxtb" } } */
+/* We shouldn't need any zero-extension idioms here. */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "\t(uxtb|and|lsr|lsl)" { xfail arm_thumb1 }
} } */
