Hi!
As reported on gcc-regression, this test FAILs on aarch64, but my
r15-2090 change didn't change anything on the generated assembly,
just added the forgotten dg-do run directive to the test, so the
test has been failing forever, just we didn't know it.
I can actually reproduce it on x86_64 with -funsigned-char too,
s2.b.a has int type and -1 is stored to it, so we should compare
it against -1 rather than (char) -1; the latter is appropriate for
testing char fields into which we've stored -1.
2024-07-18 Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com>
* c-c++-common/torture/builtin-clear-padding-3.c (main): Compare
s2.b.a against -1 rather than (char) -1.
--- gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/torture/builtin-clear-padding-3.c.jj
2024-07-17 11:38:27.071608324 +0200
+++ gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/torture/builtin-clear-padding-3.c
2024-07-18 09:16:57.836342423 +0200
@@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ main ()
foo (&s1, 0);
foo (&s2, 0);
__builtin_clear_padding (&s2);
- if (s2.b.a != (char) -1)
+ if (s2.b.a != -1)
__builtin_abort ();
__builtin_clear_padding (&s2.b.a);
__builtin_memset (&s2.b.a + 1, 0, sizeof (union U) - sizeof (s2.b.a));
Jakub
