From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9564 invoked by alias); 9 Aug 2012 08:15:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 9552 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Aug 2012 08:15:22 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE,TW_BD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from va3ehsobe010.messaging.microsoft.com (HELO va3outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com) (216.32.180.30) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Aug 2012 08:15:04 +0000 Received: from mail29-va3-R.bigfish.com (10.7.14.240) by VA3EHSOBE009.bigfish.com (10.7.40.29) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.225.23; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 08:15:01 +0000 Received: from mail29-va3 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail29-va3-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 954BA40026D; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 08:15:01 +0000 (UTC) X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:163.181.249.108;KIP:(null);UIP:(null);IPV:NLI;H:ausb3twp01.amd.com;RD:none;EFVD:NLI X-SpamScore: -13 X-BigFish: VPS-13(zz98dI9371I542M154dM1432Izz1202hzz8275bh8275dhz2dh668h839h944hd25hf0ah107ah) Received: from mail29-va3 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail29-va3 (MessageSwitch) id 1344500099435752_16605; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 08:14:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from VA3EHSMHS025.bigfish.com (unknown [10.7.14.252]) by mail29-va3.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DD6E3C0046; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 08:14:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ausb3twp01.amd.com (163.181.249.108) by VA3EHSMHS025.bigfish.com (10.7.99.35) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.225.23; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 08:14:59 +0000 X-M-MSG: Received: from sausexedgep02.amd.com (sausexedgep02-ext.amd.com [163.181.249.73]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ausb3twp01.amd.com (Axway MailGate 3.8.1) with ESMTP id 24D4E10280DB; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 03:14:55 -0500 (CDT) Received: from SAUSEXDAG02.amd.com (163.181.55.2) by sausexedgep02.amd.com (163.181.36.59) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.192.1; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 03:15:10 -0500 Received: from STOREXDAG04.amd.com (10.1.13.13) by sausexdag02.amd.com (163.181.55.2) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 03:14:55 -0500 Received: from STOREXDAG01.amd.com ([fe80::81b9:bc95:f4b7:5f24]) by storexdag04.amd.com ([fe80::bd56:e04f:8f2f:181c%19]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 04:14:53 -0400 From: "Ekanathan, Saravanan" To: "H.J. Lu" CC: "binutils@sourceware.org" Subject: RE: [PATCH] Fix for PR 14423 - Assembler doesn't recognize fma instructions in bdver2 core Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2012 10:11:00 -0000 Message-ID: <8CCF65FBE54B884C85A7D47EBF0834C799EB48@storexdag01.amd.com> References: <8CCF65FBE54B884C85A7D47EBF0834C799DD5D@storexdag01.amd.com> <8CCF65FBE54B884C85A7D47EBF0834C799DF27@storexdag01.amd.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: amd.com X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-08/txt/msg00169.txt.bz2 Hi, The files (arch-10.s and x86-64-arch-2.s) already does fma testing but i= t doesn't test whether a specific core (bdver2) supports fma or not. Re-using these assembly files and creating new .d(objdump) files with -marc= h=3Dbdver2 will not help, because these files have un-supported bdver2 inst= ructions. So, is there a way to test a core against one/all of the supported instruct= ions in the existing Assembler test framework? If not, adding a new testscase for this bug is the only option I guess. Regards, Saravanan -----Original Message----- From: H.J. Lu [mailto:hjl.tools@gmail.com]=20 Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2012 7:50 PM To: Ekanathan, Saravanan Cc: binutils@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR 14423 - Assembler doesn't recognize fma ins= tructions in bdver2 core On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 10:42 PM, Ekanathan, Saravanan wrote: > Thanks H.J.Lu for the review comments. > > PFA, the updated patch with following review comments incorporated: > 1) Used diff -upN to create the testsuite patch. > 2) ChangeLog has been updated, so it's in sync with the existing=20 > ones > > Ok for the trunk? Please add the FMA test to arch-10.s and x86-64-arch-2.s instead. H.J. --