From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id B5DC8383600D; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 11:30:57 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org B5DC8383600D
From: "avieira at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/104015] [12 regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-9.c fails
 on power 9 (only)
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 11:30:57 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: avieira at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 12.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-104015-4-X7MjZRO6P4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-104015-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-104015-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 11:30:57 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D104015

--- Comment #7 from avieira at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Yeah I'm with Richard on this one, I just checked and the generated assembl=
y is
the same for before and after my patch, so this looks like a testism.


And yeah I agree, if we were to decide to unroll this for instance then you=
'd
likely see it being printed more too, since you would likely end up with the
epilogue using the same mode.

I'll suggest changing it to just testing the existance of that string, rath=
er
than requring it N times.

Having said that, the fail will go away for this particular case with the p=
aram
change.=