On 2025-01-10 11:27, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
On 22/12/2024 15:35, Torbjorn SVENSSON wrote:
On 2024-12-19 12:48, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
On 18/12/2024 16:24, Torbjörn SVENSSON wrote:
Changes since v1:
- Updated the commit message to reflect the changes (including the subject).
- Replaced the POP/BEQ checks with chesk for {cmp,mov,orr,and}{eq,ne}.
- Removed the size check
Ok for trunk and releases/gcc-14?
Should I also push this to releases/gcc-13 and releases/gcc-12 as this is a
regression in r12-5301-g04520645038?
--
Instead of checking that a certain transformation is not used by
counting the number of return instructions and the number of BEQ
instructions, check that none of CMP, MOV, ORR and AND instructions are
suffixed with EQ or NE.
Also removed size check as it's very unstable (depends on optimization
in use).
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
PR testsuite/103298
* gcc.target/arm/pr43920-2.c: Change to assembler pattern
"(cmp|mov|orr|and)(eq|ne)" for the check. Remove size check.
Signed-off-by: Torbjörn SVENSSON <torbjorn.svens...@foss.st.com>
OK
Pushed as r15-6416-g9e1063ca1c8 and r14.2.0-584-ge79105ad8c0.
Should I also push it to releases/gcc-12 and releases/gcc-13? Or can the
bugzilla be closed regardless (regression in gcc12)?
I'm not convinced it's worth the time to validate the patch on those compilers.
It's just a testism.
Ok, I'll resolve the bugzilla without any further backports. Thanks!
Kind regards,
Torbjörn
R.
