[committed] libstdc++: Improve new testcase for std::optional assignment [PR117858]

The copy & paste bug affected two assignment operators, so ensure the new test covers both. libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog: PR libstdc++/117858 * testsuite/20_util/optional/assignment/117858.cc: Also test assignment from rvalue optional. --- Tested x86_64-linux. Pushed to trunk.

[PATCH] tree-optimization/111003 - new testcase

Testcase for fixed PR. Pushed. PR tree-optimization/111003 gcc/testsuite/ * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr111003.c: New testcase. --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr111003.c | 34 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa

[PATCH] tree-optimization/112585 - new testcase

The offending commit r14-5444-g5ea2965b499f9e was reverted. The following adds a testcase. Pushed. PR tree-optimization/112585 * gcc.dg/torture/pr112585.c: New testcase. --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr112585.c | 18 ++ 1 file changed, 18 insertions

[PATCH] tree-optimization/111792 - new testcase

This was fixed as part of the PR111000 fix. Tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, pushed. PR tree-optimization/111792 PR tree-optimization/111000 * gcc.dg/torture/pr111792.c: New testcase. --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr111792.c | 39 + 1 file

[PATCH] Add another new testcase

While working on improving min/max detection, this code (which is reduced from worse_state in ipa-pure-const.cc) was being miscompiled. Since there was no testcase in the testsuite yet for this, this patch adds one. Committed as obvious after testing the testcase via: make check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS="

[Committed] New testcase

While I was writting a match.pd patch, I can across GCC was being miscompiled but no testcase was failing. So this adds that testcase. Committed after testing on x86_64 with make check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS="execute.exp=20230509-1.c" gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gcc.c-torture/execute/20230509-1

[PATCH] tree-optimization/109724 - new testcase

The following adds a testcase for PR109724 which was caused by backporting r13-2375-gbe1b42de9c151d and fixed by r11-199-g2b42509f8b7bdf. Tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, pushed. PR tree-optimization/109724 * g++.dg/torture/pr109724.C: New testcase. --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg

Re: [PATCH] New testcase

gt; > in the testsuite for this. > > > > Pushed. > > > > * g++.dg/torture/20230313.C: New testcase. > > I've noticed this testcase FAILs on i686-linux with > -fstack-protector-strong. > > sizeof (auto_vec) == 16, which in this case contains > 4

Re: [PATCH] New testcase

g++.dg/torture/20230313.C: New testcase. I've noticed this testcase FAILs on i686-linux with -fstack-protector-strong. sizeof (auto_vec) == 16, which in this case contains 4-byte m_vec (which points to to m_auto), then 8-byte m_auto which contains just 8-byte m_vecpfx and finally 1 byte m_

[PATCH] New testcase

This is a reduced testcase for an issue I ran into when trying to improve PTA compile-time further, there wasn't any C family runfail in the testsuite for this. Pushed. * g++.dg/torture/20230313.C: New testcase. --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/torture/20230313.C

[PATCH] tree-optimization/108868 - new testcase

New testcase for the fixed bug. Pushed. PR tree-optimization/108868 * gcc.dg/pr108868.c: New testcase. --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr108868.c | 17 + 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr108868.c diff --git a/gcc/testsuite

[PATCH] tree-optimization/108855 - new testcase

New testcase for the fixed bug. Pushed. PR tree-optimization/108855 * gcc.dg/pr108855.c: New testcase. --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr108855.c | 23 +++ 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr108855.c diff --git a/gcc

[PATCH] New testcase for uninit

the false positive but with GCC 12 we get a bogus diagnostic. Pushed. * gcc.dg/uninit-pred-11.c: New testcase. --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/uninit-pred-11.c | 27 +++ 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/uninit-pred-11.c diff --git a

Re: [PATCH 3/3] analyzer: add a new testcase to demonstrate passsing of a file descriptor to a function that does not emit any warning

On Wed, 2022-07-06 at 19:55 +0530, Immad Mir wrote: > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > * gcc.dg/analyzer/fd-4.c: Add a new testcase to demonstrate > passsing > of a file descriptor to a function that does not emit any > warning. The patch itself is OK for trunk, but the

[PATCH 3/3] analyzer: add a new testcase to demonstrate passsing of a file descriptor to a function that does not emit any warning

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gcc.dg/analyzer/fd-4.c: Add a new testcase to demonstrate passsing of a file descriptor to a function that does not emit any warning. Signed-off-by: Immad Mir --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/analyzer/fd-4.c | 10 ++ 1 file changed, 10 insertions

[Committed] Restrict new testcase gcc.target/i386/pr80270.c to x86_64.

Committed as obvious (in hindsight). 2022-03-01 Roger Sayle gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog * gcc.target/i386/pr80270.c: Don't compile new test case on ia32. Sorry for the noise. Roger -- diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr80270.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr80270.c index 8

[PATCH] [Committed] New testcase for C++/71792, bitfields and auto

From: Andrew Pinski This testcase used to fail before GCC 6.4.0 due to the wrong type being used for auto when used with bitfields, the C++ front-end was using the "bitfield" type rather than the underlaying type. Committed the testcase after a quick check. PR c++/71792 gcc/testsuite/C

[PATCH] target/97192 - new testcase for fixed PR

This adds another testcase for the PR97085 fix. Pused. 2020-09-24 Richard Biener PR tree-optimization/97085 * gcc.dg/pr97192.c: New testcase. --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr97192.c | 16 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg

[committed] libstdc++: Add new testcase for comparison category types

116e3cfc7b8ab8afc4bdbc03db6b194413218af7 Author: Jonathan Wakely Date: Wed May 27 13:13:19 2020 +0100 libstdc++: Add new testcase for comparison category types Comparing a comparison category type to anything except a literal 0 is undefined. This verifies that at least some misuses are

[PATCH] New testcase for PR92228

Committed. Richard. 2019-10-29 Richard Biener PR tree-optimization/92241 * gcc.dg/torture/pr92241-2.c: New testcase. Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr92241-2.c === --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr92241

[PATCH] rs6000: Fix new testcase

At least with -m32 you need -maltivec if you #include . Tested on powerpc64-linux {-m32,-m64); committing to trunk. Segher 2019-06-05 Segher Boessenkool gcc/testsuite/ * g++.target/powerpc/undef-bool-3.C: Add -maltivec to dg-options. --- gcc/testsuite/g++.target/powerpc/undef-bool

New testcase

The following adds a testcase I managed to break when trying to make SSA names safe_from_p. Richard. 2019-03-27 Richard Biener * gcc.dg/torture/20190327-1.c: New testcase. Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/20190327-1.c

[PATCH 6/6] rs6000: New testcase fp-convert.c

This tests the generated code for all conversions between floating point point types, binary and decimal. 2018-07-16 Segher Boessenkool gcc/testsuite/ * gcc.target/powerpc/convert-fp-128.c: New testcase. * gcc.target/powerpc/convert-fp-64.c: New testcase. --- gcc/testsuite

[PATCH][OBVIOUS] PR85347: New testcase vec-ldl-1.c FAILs on powerpc64-linux

This new test case required a dejagnu qualifier to restrict its execution on big-endian platforms. The patch bootstrapped and tested without regressions.  Was committed as obvious. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: 2018-04-12  Kelvin Nilsen      PR target/85347     * gcc.target/powerpc/vec-ldl-1.c: Ch

[PATCH] rs6000: Tune new testcase (PR83629)

It has some problems running on some 64-bit configuratiions, and the bug it is testing for is only on 32-bit; so let's not run it elsewhere. Committing to trunk. Segher 2018-01-12 Segher Boessenkool gcc/testsuite/ PR target/83629 * gcc.target/powerpc/pr83629.c: Require ilp3

Re: [PATCH] PR c++/80287 add new testcase

On 08/18/2017 04:28 AM, Yvan Roux wrote: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-07/msg00730.html Thanks, Yvan gcc/testsuite 2017-07-13 Yvan Roux PR c++/80287 * g++.dg/pr80287.C: New test. ok -- Nathan Sidwell

Re: [PATCH] PR c++/80287 add new testcase

On 4 August 2017 at 15:52, Yvan Roux wrote: > On 13 July 2017 at 14:02, Yvan Roux wrote: >> Hi, >> >> as discussed in the PR, this patch adds a new reduced testcase which >> doesn't rely on c++17 features, this is a prereq to the backport of >> the fix into GCC 6 branch which is impacted by this

Re: [PATCH] PR c++/80287 add new testcase

On 13 July 2017 at 14:02, Yvan Roux wrote: > Hi, > > as discussed in the PR, this patch adds a new reduced testcase which > doesn't rely on c++17 features, this is a prereq to the backport of > the fix into GCC 6 branch which is impacted by this issue. > > Validated on x86, ARM and AArch64 targets

[PATCH] PR c++/80287 add new testcase

Hi, as discussed in the PR, this patch adds a new reduced testcase which doesn't rely on c++17 features, this is a prereq to the backport of the fix into GCC 6 branch which is impacted by this issue. Validated on x86, ARM and AArch64 targets. Ok for trunk ? and maybe on gcc-7-branch ? Thanks, Y

Re: [PATCH v2] New testcase to check parameter passing bug

crashing.org; christophe.l...@st.com > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] New testcase to check parameter passing bug > > > > On 03/18/15 19:40, Honggyu Kim wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I have modified the test-case to check parameter passing bug based on > &g

RE: [PATCH v2] New testcase to check parameter passing bug

> -Original Message- > From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com] > Sent: 25 March 2015 12:27 > To: Honggyu Kim; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: Kyrylo Tkachov; seg...@kernel.crashing.org; christophe.l...@st.com > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] New testcase to check parameter pass

Re: [PATCH v2] New testcase to check parameter passing bug

On 03/18/15 19:40, Honggyu Kim wrote: Hi, I have modified the test-case to check parameter passing bug based on the comments from Kyrill Tkachov, Christophe Lyon, and Segher Boessenkool as follows: 1. move from "gcc.target/arm" to "gcc.dg" 2. change "dg-do compile" to "dg-do run" Please let

Re: [PATCH v2] New testcase to check parameter passing bug

On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:40:44AM +0900, Honggyu Kim wrote: > --- > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog|4 > gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr65358.c | 33 + > 2 files changed, 37 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr65358.c > > diff --git a/gcc

[PATCH v2] New testcase to check parameter passing bug

Hi, I have modified the test-case to check parameter passing bug based on the comments from Kyrill Tkachov, Christophe Lyon, and Segher Boessenkool as follows: 1. move from "gcc.target/arm" to "gcc.dg" 2. change "dg-do compile" to "dg-do run" Please let me know if there's still something to fix

Re: [PATCH][ARM] New testcase to check parameter passing bug

Hi Honggyu, On 16/03/15 00:53, Honggyu Kim wrote: new file mode 100644 index 000..3790764 --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr65358.c @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ +/* { dg-do run */ Forgot to close the brace here after 'run' Dejagnu happily ignores that and transforms this into a compile-only

RE: [PATCH][ARM] New testcase to check parameter passing bug

Hi, I have modified and moved the testcase following your comments. (from gcc.target/arm to gcc.dg) Please let me know if there's still something to fix more. I appreciate all your comments. Honggyu --- gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog|4 gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr65358.c | 33 +++

Re: [PATCH][ARM] New testcase to check parameter passing bug

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 12:04:28PM -, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr65358.c > > b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr65358.c > > new file mode 100644 > > index 000..d663dcf > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr65358.c > > @@ -0,0 +1,

Re: [PATCH][ARM] New testcase to check parameter passing bug

On 03/13/15 13:04, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: Hi, Hi Honggyu, Thanks for helping out. I've got a couple of pointers for the testcase inline. I have wrote a testcase that reproduces argument overwriting bug during arm code generation. I wrote this testcase with the help of Mikael Pettersson. If

RE: [PATCH][ARM] New testcase to check parameter passing bug

> Hi, Hi Honggyu, Thanks for helping out. I've got a couple of pointers for the testcase inline. > > I have wrote a testcase that reproduces argument overwriting bug during > arm code generation. > > I wrote this testcase with the help of Mikael Pettersson. > If some format is not proper to ru

[PATCH][ARM] New testcase to check parameter passing bug

Hi, I have wrote a testcase that reproduces argument overwriting bug during arm code generation. I wrote this testcase with the help of Mikael Pettersson. If some format is not proper to run in gcc testsuite framework, please correct me. Please refer to the following bugzilla link for details: h

[Committed] Add a new testcase

aarch64_float_const_representable_p in aarch64.c. Thanks, Andrew Pinski ChangeLog: * gcc.c-torture/execute/20141125-1.c: New testcase. Index: testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/20141125-1.c === --- testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/20141125-1.c(revision 0

Re: [Committed] New testcase for conditional move with conditional compares

't ICE for me with aarch64-none-elf trunk. I meant with conditional compare patches applied. Thanks, Andrew > > Kyrill > >> Thanks, >> Andrew Pinski >> >> 2014-06-23 Andrew Pinski >> >> * gcc.c-torture/compile/20140723-1.c: New testcase. > >

Re: [Committed] New testcase for conditional move with conditional compares

This patch adds that testcase to the C torture compile test to make sure we don't ICE (which I think we do currently). FWIW, this doesn't ICE for me with aarch64-none-elf trunk. Kyrill Thanks, Andrew Pinski 2014-06-23 Andrew Pinski * gcc.c-torture/compile/20140723-1.c: New testcase.

[Committed] New testcase for conditional move with conditional compares

re compile test to make sure we don't ICE (which I think we do currently). Thanks, Andrew Pinski 2014-06-23 Andrew Pinski * gcc.c-torture/compile/20140723-1.c: New testcase. Index: gcc.c-torture/compile/20140723-1.c === --

[committed] Add new testcase (PR ipa/pr58290)

Hi! Richard fixed this PR recently by adding a fixup_cfg pass again right after IPA passes, I'm just including a testcase from this PR, verified on x86_64-linux and verified it fails again if I comment out the fixup_cfg pass from passes.def. Committed as obvious to trunk. 2013-12-17 Jakub Jelin

RE: [PATCH middle-end/58463] New testcase

> -Original Message- > From: Jakub Jelinek [mailto:ja...@redhat.com] > Sent: 23 September 2013 14:49 > To: Paulo Matos > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH middle-end/58463] New testcase > > The testcase looks good, the ChangeLog entry is still wr

Re: [PATCH middle-end/58463] New testcase

On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 01:43:49PM +, Paulo Matos wrote: > 2013-09-20 Paulo Matos > > * gcc.c-torture/pr58463.c: New testcase for pr58463 The testcase looks good, the ChangeLog entry is still wrong. Should be 2013-09-23 Paulo Matos

[PATCH middle-end/58463] New testcase

2013-09-20 Paulo Matos * gcc.c-torture/pr58463.c: New testcase for pr58463 Paulo Matos 0001-2013-09-23-Paulo-Matos-pmatos-broadcom.com.patch Description: 0001-2013-09-23-Paulo-Matos-pmatos-broadcom.com.patch

RE: [PR58463] New testcase for pr58463

> -Original Message- > From: Jakub Jelinek [mailto:ja...@redhat.com] > Sent: 20 September 2013 16:50 > To: Paulo Matos > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: Re: [PR58463] New testcase for pr58463 > > That is not the right place (and, note the ChangeLog entry

Re: [PR58463] New testcase for pr58463

On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 03:45:17PM +, Paulo Matos wrote: > Please find the patch attached. > > I have added the test to gcc.c-torture, please let me know if this is not the > right place. > > 2013-09-20 Paulo Matos > > * gcc.

[PR58463] New testcase for pr58463

Please find the patch attached. I have added the test to gcc.c-torture, please let me know if this is not the right place. 2013-09-20 Paulo Matos * gcc.c-torture/pr58463.c: New testcase. Paulo Matos pr58463-testcase.patch Description: pr58463

[Committed] Add new testcase

/builtins-1.c: New testcase. Index: gcc.dg/torture/builtins-1.c === --- gcc.dg/torture/builtins-1.c (revision 0) +++ gcc.dg/torture/builtins-1.c (revision 0) @@ -0,0 +1,9 @@ +/* { dg-do compile } */ +/* { dg-options "-fdump-rtl-e

[PATCH] New testcase

This adds a testcase I reduced from a genmodes miscompile with one of my pending VRP patches. Committed. Richard. 2012-06-15 Richard Guenther * gcc.c-torture/execute/20120615-1.c: New testcase. Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/20120615-1.c

Re: [i386] New testcase (was: [rtl, patch] combine concat+shuffle)

On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Marc Glisse wrote: > > Ping? The rest of the patch has been approved already. > > > On Thu, 10 May 2012, Marc Glisse wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> could an i386 maintainer take a look at the following testcase? >> >> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog >> 2012-05-08  Marc Glisse  

Re: [i386] New testcase (was: [rtl, patch] combine concat+shuffle)

Ping? The rest of the patch has been approved already. On Thu, 10 May 2012, Marc Glisse wrote: Hello, could an i386 maintainer take a look at the following testcase? gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog 2012-05-08 Marc Glisse * gcc.target/i386/shuf-concat.c: New test. --- gcc.target/i386/s

[i386] New testcase (was: [rtl, patch] combine concat+shuffle)

Hello, could an i386 maintainer take a look at the following testcase? gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog 2012-05-08 Marc Glisse * gcc.target/i386/shuf-concat.c: New test. --- gcc.target/i386/shuf-concat.c (revision 0) +++ gcc.target/i386/shuf-concat.c (revision 0) @@ -0,0 +1,13 @

[PATCH] New testcase for -flto -g

Committed. Richard. 2011-12-13 Richard Guenther * gcc.dg/lto/20111213-1_0.c: New testcase. Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/lto/20111213-1_0.c === --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/lto/20111213-1_0.c (revision 0) +++ gcc