From 51f1287e0a207c60329b64e6085f39766ee8be2a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Andrew Pinski <apinski@marvell.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2023 21:41:01 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] Remove xfail from gcc.dg/tree-ssa/20040204-1.c
So the xfail was there because at one point the difference
from having logical-op-non-short-circuit set to 1 or 0 made a
difference in being able to optimizing a conditional way.
This has not been true for over 10 years in this case so
instead of keeping on adding to the xfail list, removing it
is the right thing to do.
Committed as obvious after a test on x86_64-linux-gnu.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/20040204-1.c: Remove xfail.
---
gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/20040204-1.c | 6 +-----
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/20040204-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/20040204-1.c
index b9f8fd21ac9f..aa9f68b8b42f 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/20040204-1.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/20040204-1.c
@@ -29,8 +29,4 @@ void test55 (int x, int y)
/* There should be not link_error calls, if there is any the
optimization has failed */
-/* ??? Ug. This one may or may not fail based on how fold decides
- that the && should be emitted (based on BRANCH_COST). Fix this
- by teaching dom to look through && and register all components
- as true. */
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "link_error" 0 "optimized" { xfail { ! "alpha*-*-* arm*-*-* aarch64*-*-* powerpc*-*-* cris-*-* hppa*-*-* i?86-*-* mmix-*-* mips*-*-* m68k*-*-* moxie-*-* nds32*-*-* s390*-*-* sh*-*-* sparc*-*-* visium-*-* x86_64-*-* riscv*-*-* or1k*-*-* msp430-*-* pru*-*-* nvptx*-*-*" } } } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "link_error" 0 "optimized" } } */
--
GitLab