diff options
| author | Vineet Gupta <vineetg@rivosinc.com> | 2023-10-17 10:05:41 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Vineet Gupta <vineetg@rivosinc.com> | 2023-10-17 13:12:58 -0700 |
| commit | 9cad42786ca28461633d524bbb6480f388bfdc55 (patch) | |
| tree | 40fb0106c7c03a3969204066de5be011c9aeb960 | |
| parent | 1f186f64b8602d74769af4a6250255e51227f744 (diff) | |
| download | gcc-9cad42786ca28461633d524bbb6480f388bfdc55.zip gcc-9cad42786ca28461633d524bbb6480f388bfdc55.tar.gz gcc-9cad42786ca28461633d524bbb6480f388bfdc55.tar.bz2 | |
RISC-V/testsuite/pr111466.c: update test and expected output
Update the test to potentially generate two SEXT.W instructions: one for
incoming function arg, other for function return.
But after commit 8eb9cdd14218
("expr: don't clear SUBREG_PROMOTED_VAR_P flag for a promoted subreg")
the test is not supposed to generate either of them so fix the expected
assembler output which was errorneously introduced by commit above.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* gcc.target/riscv/pr111466.c (foo2): Change return to unsigned
int as that will potentially generate two SEXT.W instructions.
dg-final: Change to scan-assembler-not SEXT.W.
Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta <vineetg@rivosinc.com>
| -rw-r--r-- | gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/pr111466.c | 4 |
1 files changed, 2 insertions, 2 deletions
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/pr111466.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/pr111466.c index 0077924..3348d59 100644 --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/pr111466.c +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/pr111466.c @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ /* { dg-options "-march=rv64gc_zba_zbs -mabi=lp64" } */ /* { dg-skip-if "" { *-*-* } { "-O0" } } */ -int foo2(int unused, int n, unsigned y, unsigned delta){ +unsigned int foo2(int unused, int n, unsigned y, unsigned delta){ int s = 0; unsigned int x = 0; for (;x<n;x +=delta) @@ -12,4 +12,4 @@ int foo2(int unused, int n, unsigned y, unsigned delta){ return s; } -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "\msext\M" } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "\msext\M" } } */ |