[COMMITTED] Revert "Revert "testsuite/gcc.target/cris/pr93372-2.c: Handle xpass from combine improvement"" combine improvement

Message ID 20240508022601.E338220432@pchp3.se.axis.com
State New
Headers
Series [COMMITTED] Revert "Revert "testsuite/gcc.target/cris/pr93372-2.c: Handle xpass from combine improvement"" combine improvement |

Checks

Context Check Description
linaro-tcwg-bot/tcwg_gcc_build--master-arm warning Patch is already merged
linaro-tcwg-bot/tcwg_gcc_build--master-aarch64 warning Patch is already merged

Commit Message

Hans-Peter Nilsson May 8, 2024, 2:26 a.m. UTC
  > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp@axis.com>
> Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2024 01:16:32 +0200

I committed this revert of a revert, as r15-311, as the
prerequisite was also revert-reverted, in r15-268.

-- >8 --
This reverts commit 39f81924d88e3cc197fc3df74204c9b5e01e12f7.
---
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/cris/pr93372-2.c | 15 ++++++++-------
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
  

Patch

diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/cris/pr93372-2.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/cris/pr93372-2.c
index 912069c018d5..2ef6471a990b 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/cris/pr93372-2.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/cris/pr93372-2.c
@@ -1,19 +1,20 @@ 
 /* Check that eliminable compare-instructions are eliminated. */
 /* { dg-do compile } */
 /* { dg-options "-O2" } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "\tcmp|\ttest" { xfail *-*-* } } } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "\tnot" { xfail cc0 } } } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "\tlsr" { xfail cc0 } } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "\tcmp|\ttest" } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "\tnot" } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "\tlsr" } } */
+/* We should get just one move, storing the result into *d.  */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "\tmove" 1 } } */
 
 int f(int a, int b, int *d)
 {
   int c = a - b;
 
-  /* Whoops!  We get a cmp.d with the original operands here. */
+  /* We used to get a cmp.d with the original operands here. */
   *d = (c == 0);
 
-  /* Whoops!  While we don't get a test.d for the result here for cc0,
-     we get a sequence of insns: a move, a "not" and a shift of the
-     subtraction-result, where a simple "spl" would have done. */
+  /* We used to get a suboptimal sequence, but now we get the optimal "sge"
+     (a.k.a "spl") re-using flags from the subtraction. */
   return c >= 0;
 }