Ping? It's been a week:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-March/679330.html
> Three tests FAIL on Solaris/x86 in similar ways:
>
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr111673.c check-function-bodies advance
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr82142a.c check-function-bodies assignzero
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr82142b.c check-function-bodies assignzero
>
> All tests FAIL as is because they lack either or both of the .LFB0 label
> and the .cfi_startproc directive:
>
> * The 32-bit pr82142b.c test lacks both, whether as or gas is in use: as
> lacks full support for the cfi directives and the .LSB0 label is only
> emitted with -fasynchronous-unwind-tables.
>
> * The 64-bit tests pr111673.c and pr82142a.c already work with gas, but
> with as the cfi directives are again missing.
>
> In addition, the 32-bit test (pr82142b.c) still FAILs because 32-bit
> Solaris/x86 defaults to -mstackrealign.
>
> To fix all this, this patch adds -fasynchronous-unwind-tables
> -fdwarf2-cfi-asm to all tests to force the generation of both the .LFB0
> label and .cfi_startproc (which is ok since they are compile tests). In
> addition, pr82142b.c is compiled with -mno-stackrealign to avoid
> platform differences.
>
> I'm a bit uncertain if we want to force all those options
> unconditionally, though they don't cause harm. One might only add them
> for Solaris via dg-additional-options and/or require cfi support instead?
>
> Tested on i386-pc-solaris2.11 and x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
>
> Ok for trunk?
>
> Rainer
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
