[Bug fortran/31615] New: testsuite failure in gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90

[Bug fortran/31615] New: testsuite failure in gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90

[ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org]

I'm getting a testsuite failure in gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90 with GCC trunk
on sparc-sun-solaris2.10:

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2007-04/msg00897.html

The logfile says:
FAIL: gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90  -O  scan-tree-dump-times Alignment of access
forced using versioning. 3

Running the testcase by hand via:

f951 /tmp/kg/basel/egcc-SVN20070414/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90
-quiet -dumpbase vect-5.f90 -mcpu=ultrasparc -mvis -auxbase vect-5 -O -O2
-version -ftree-vectorize -ftree-vectorizer-verbose=4 -fdump-tree-vect-stats
-fintrinsic-modules-path finclude -o vect-5.s

yields a file with two matches instead of the expected three.


-- 
           Summary: testsuite failure in gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.3.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: fortran
        AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: sparc-sun-solaris2.10


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31615

[Bug fortran/31615] testsuite failure in gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90

[fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 

fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever Confirmed|0                           |1
   Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00         |2007-04-18 06:35:48
               date|                            |
            Summary|testsuite failure in        |testsuite failure in
                   |gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90 |gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31615

[Bug fortran/31615] testsuite failure in gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90

[dorit at il dot ibm dot com]

------- Comment #1 from dorit at il dot ibm dot com  2007-04-18 06:42 -------
could you please provide the .vect dump file, as generated with
-fdump-tree-vect-details?


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31615

[Bug fortran/31615] testsuite failure in gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90

[ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #2 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-04-18 07:05 -------
Created an attachment (id=13387)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13387&action=view)
Dump file using -fdump-tree-vect-details

Created dump file using -fdump-tree-vect-details


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31615

[Bug fortran/31615] testsuite failure in gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90

[dorit at il dot ibm dot com]

------- Comment #3 from dorit at il dot ibm dot com  2007-04-18 10:18 -------
> Created dump file using -fdump-tree-vect-details

thanks. So I don't understand why we expect to version for 3 different
data-references, since there are only 2 in the loop that is vectorized. But
then I wonder why we don't see the same failure on ia64?


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31615

[Bug fortran/31615] testsuite failure in gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90

[ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #4 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-04-19 05:11 -------
(In reply to comment #3)
> But then I wonder why we don't see the same failure on ia64?

Because the failing part of the testcase is only done on ilp32 targets:

! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Alignment of access forced using
versioning." 3 "vect" { target { ilp32 && vect_no_align
} } } }


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31615

[Bug fortran/31615] testsuite failure in gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90

[dorit at il dot ibm dot com]

------- Comment #5 from dorit at il dot ibm dot com  2007-04-19 07:27 -------
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > But then I wonder why we don't see the same failure on ia64?
> Because the failing part of the testcase is only done on ilp32 targets:
> ! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Alignment of access forced using
> versioning." 3 "vect" { target { ilp32 && vect_no_align
> } } } }

ah, ok. so, in that case we probably want to just change the '3' to '2' in the
above test:

Index: testsuite/gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90
===================================================================
--- testsuite/gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90       (revision 123954)
+++ testsuite/gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90       (working copy)
@@ -38,7 +38,7 @@
 ! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 1 loops" 1 "vect"  } }
 ! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Alignment of access forced using peeling"
1 "vect" { xfail { vect_no_align } } } }
 ! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Vectorizing an unaligned access" 1 "vect"
{ xfail { vect_no_align } } } }
-! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Alignment of access forced using
versioning." 3 "vect" { target { ilp32 && vect_no_align } } } }
+! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Alignment of access forced using
versioning." 2 "vect" { target { ilp32 && vect_no_align } } } }

 ! We also expect to vectorize one loop for lp64 targets that support
 ! misaligned access:


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31615

[Bug fortran/31615] testsuite failure in gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90

[ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #6 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-04-25 18:14 -------
(In reply to comment #5)
> ah, ok. so, in that case we probably want to just change the '3' to '2' in the
> above test:
> Index: testsuite/gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90
> ===================================================================
> --- testsuite/gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90       (revision 123954)
> +++ testsuite/gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90       (working copy)
> @@ -38,7 +38,7 @@
>  ! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 1 loops" 1 "vect"  } }
>  ! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Alignment of access forced using peeling"
> 1 "vect" { xfail { vect_no_align } } } }
>  ! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Vectorizing an unaligned access" 1 "vect"
> { xfail { vect_no_align } } } }
> -! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Alignment of access forced using
> versioning." 3 "vect" { target { ilp32 && vect_no_align } } } }
> +! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Alignment of access forced using
> versioning." 2 "vect" { target { ilp32 && vect_no_align } } } }
>  ! We also expect to vectorize one loop for lp64 targets that support
>  ! misaligned access:

Are you going to submit/install your patch?


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31615

[Bug fortran/31615] testsuite failure in gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90

[dorit at il dot ibm dot com]

------- Comment #7 from dorit at il dot ibm dot com  2007-04-25 21:30 -------
> Are you going to submit/install your patch?

yes, I'll go ahead and submit the patch


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31615

[Bug fortran/31615] testsuite failure in gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90

[ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #8 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-05-19 06:02 -------
fixed:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2007-05/msg00150.html

by this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-04/msg01733.html


-- 

ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED
   Target Milestone|---                         |4.3.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31615