From: Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2022 21:29:29 +0000 (-0400)
Subject: Fix testsuite fallout from pr104960 change
X-Git-Tag: basepoints/gcc-13~585
X-Git-Url: http://git.ipfire.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?a=commitdiff_plain;h=6f30c4cd38b8385d62358065d795df590e752d6e;p=thirdparty%2Fgcc.git

Fix testsuite fallout from pr104960 change

Recent changes twiddled the output for s390/arch13/sel-1.c causing testsuite failures.  As far as I can tell both sequences are equivalent from a performance standpoint.   This patch changes the test to accept both forms.

gcc/testsuite
	* gcc.target/s390/arch13/sel-1.c: Adjust expected output.
---

diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/s390/arch13/sel-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/s390/arch13/sel-1.c
index 301a133ea912..52ca078f5ef8 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/s390/arch13/sel-1.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/s390/arch13/sel-1.c
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ sel32 (int a, int then, int els)
    too expensive.  THe reason is that additional load instructions
    emitted by ifcvt are part of the costs although these should get
    removed later.  */
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "\tselrh\t" 1 } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "\tselr(?:h|le)\t" 1 } } */
 
 long long
 sel64 (int a, long long then, long long els)
@@ -18,4 +18,4 @@ sel64 (int a, long long then, long long els)
   return a > 42 ? then : els;
 }
 
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "\tselgrh\t" 1 } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "\tselgr(?:h|le)\t" 1 } } */