On Wed, 9 Jul 2025 at 10:25, Torbjörn SVENSSON <torbjorn.svens...@foss.st.com> wrote: > > Ok for trunk and releases/gcc-15? > > Changes since v1: > - Removed the acceptance of LDR as it's only generated without > r15-7373-g5163cf2ae14. Since > I'm currently looking into gcc-14 release, and made the patch in that > scope, I ran it on > trunk to ensure no new failures, but it's not actually needed. > As I said in the previous version of your patch, the test passes on trunk in the various configurations we test.
Do you mean that you see it failing in gcc-14, and this patch is what you use in gcc-14 and would like to apply to trunk and gcc-15 even though the test passes there? Thanks, Christophe > -- > > The scheduler allows the `and` instruction to be placed at 3 different > locations. Update the function body to contain all 3 locations. > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > > * gcc.target/arm/unsigned-extend-2.c: Add missing potential > locations for `and` instruction. > > Signed-off-by: Torbjörn SVENSSON <torbjorn.svens...@foss.st.com> > --- > gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/unsigned-extend-2.c | 10 +++++++--- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/unsigned-extend-2.c > b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/unsigned-extend-2.c > index d9f95a14277..15bc5a4c14d 100644 > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/unsigned-extend-2.c > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/unsigned-extend-2.c > @@ -7,15 +7,19 @@ > ** foo: > ** movs (r[0-9]+), #8 > ** ( > +** ( > +** and r0, r1, r0, lsr #1 > ** subs \1, \1, #1 > ** ands \1, \1, #255 > -** and r0, r1, r0, lsr #1 > -** bne .L[0-9]+ > -** bx lr > ** | > ** subs \1, \1, #1 > ** and r0, r1, r0, lsr #1 > ** ands \1, \1, #255 > +** | > +** subs \1, \1, #1 > +** ands \1, \1, #255 > +** and r0, r1, r0, lsr #1 > +** ) > ** bne .L[0-9]+ > ** bx lr > ** | > -- > 2.25.1 >
