On 11/24/25 05:49, Rainer Orth wrote: > A couple of gcc.dg/debug/dwarf2/dwarf-btf-*-tag-*.c tests FAIL on > Solaris/SPARC when the native assembler is used: > > FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/dwarf2/dwarf-btf-decl-tag-1.c scan-assembler-times > DW_AT_const_value: "my_foo" 1 > FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/dwarf2/dwarf-btf-decl-tag-1.c scan-assembler-times > DW_AT_name: "btf_decl_tag" 1 > FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/dwarf2/dwarf-btf-type-tag-1.c scan-assembler-times > DW_AT_const_value: "__user" 1 > FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/dwarf2/dwarf-btf-type-tag-1.c scan-assembler-times > DW_AT_name: "btf_type_tag" 1 > FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/dwarf2/dwarf-btf-type-tag-10.c scan-assembler-times > DW_AT_name: "btf_decl_tag" 1 > FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/dwarf2/dwarf-btf-type-tag-10.c scan-assembler-times > DW_AT_name: "btf_type_tag" 1 > FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/dwarf2/dwarf-btf-type-tag-2.c scan-assembler-times > DW_AT_const_value: "tag1" 1 > FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/dwarf2/dwarf-btf-type-tag-2.c scan-assembler-times > DW_AT_const_value: "tag2" 1 > FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/dwarf2/dwarf-btf-type-tag-4.c scan-assembler-times > DW_AT_name: "btf_type_tag" 1 > FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/dwarf2/dwarf-btf-type-tag-5.c scan-assembler-times > DW_AT_const_value: "tagged_arr" 1 > FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/dwarf2/dwarf-btf-type-tag-5.c scan-assembler-times > DW_AT_name: "btf_type_tag" 1 > > All of them FAIL in the same way: when gas is used, the tests contain > something like > > .uaword .LLASF4 ! DW_AT_const_value: "my_foo" > > while for /bin/as > > .ascii "my_foo\0" ! DW_AT_const_value > > is emitted. While other dwarf2 tests support both forms, the tests > above don't. This patch fixes this. To make the regex more readable, > they are switched to using braces instead of double quotes, thus > avoiding excessive escaping. At the same time, they now use > newline-sensitive matching to avoid .* matching across lines.
Thank you for the diagnosis and for the patch, looks OK to me. And I learned something new about test regex :) > > Tested on sparc-sun-solaris2.11 with as and gas, and > x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. Also tested locally with x86-64 and bpf, no issues. > > Ok for trunk. > > Rainer > Thanks, David
