On 12/10/2023 9:37 PM, Kito Cheng wrote:
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr83518.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr83518.C index b8a2bd1ebbd..6f2fc56c82c 100644 --- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr83518.C +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr83518.C @@ -24,4 +24,4 @@ unsigned test() return sum; } -/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump "return 15;" "optimized" { xfail vect_variable_length } } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump "return 15;" "optimized" { xfail { vect_variable_length && aarch64*-*-* } } } } */aarch64?
I found the patch which added the xfail vect_variable_length originating from https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/mptfszz8vxw....@arm.com/. The patch mentioned how it was tested on aarch64 which is why I added it. Should I change it to ! riscv_v?
Edwin
