On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 01:28:40PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > Ok to skip the test on s390* until then?
>
> Can we change the test to do
>
> { dg-skip-if "not implemented" { ! { target x86_64-*-* <few others> } } }
>
> instead? IIRC it's nowhere implemented but on x86_64.
I don't know, perhaps.
Seems the target hook is only defined on
config/i386/i386.c:#undef TARGET_ZERO_CALL_USED_REGS
config/i386/i386.c:#define TARGET_ZERO_CALL_USED_REGS ix86_zero_call_used_regs
config/sparc/sparc.c:#undef TARGET_ZERO_CALL_USED_REGS
config/sparc/sparc.c:#define TARGET_ZERO_CALL_USED_REGS
sparc_zero_call_used_regs
but apparently many of the tests actually succeed on various targets that
don't define those hooks. E.g. I haven't seen them to fail on aarch64,
on arm only the -10.c fails, on powerpc*/s390* all {8,9,10,11} fail (plus
5 is skipped on power*-aix*).
On ia64 according to testresults {6,7,8,9,10,11} fail, some with ICEs.
On mipsel according to testresults {9,10,11} fail, some with ICEs.
On nvptx at least 1-9 succeed, 10-11 don't know, don't have assert.h around.
So, do we want to fill in negative dg-skip-if for the 6-11 tests or
positive? In any case, is there any hope any of the maintainers or the
original submitter will change anything for GCC 12, or are we going to end
up with a very narrowly supported feature?
Jakub
