[Bug testsuite/109572] New: new test case gcc.dg/vect/pr109011-4.c from r14-108-g705b0d2b62318b fails

[Bug testsuite/109572] New: new test case gcc.dg/vect/pr109011-4.c from r14-108-g705b0d2b62318b fails

[seurer at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109572

            Bug ID: 109572
           Summary: new test case gcc.dg/vect/pr109011-4.c from
                    r14-108-g705b0d2b62318b fails
           Product: gcc
           Version: 14.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: testsuite
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
  Target Milestone: ---

g:705b0d2b62318b3935214f08a1cf023b1117acb8, r14-108-g705b0d2b62318b
make  -k check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS="vect.exp=gcc.dg/vect/pr109011-4.c"
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr109011-4.c scan-tree-dump-times optimized " = .CTZ \\(" 4
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr109011-4.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects  scan-tree-dump-times
optimized " = .CTZ \\(" 4
# of expected passes            2
# of unexpected failures        2


spawn -ignore SIGHUP /home/seurer/gcc/git/build/gcc-test/gcc/xgcc
-B/home/seurer/gcc/git/build/gcc-test/gcc/
/home/seurer/gcc/git/gcc-test/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr109011-4.c
-fdiagnostics-plain-output -O3 -fno-unroll-loops
--param=vect-epilogues-nomask=0 -fdump-tree-optimized -mpower9-vector -S -o
pr109011-4.s

PASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr109011-4.c (test for excess errors)
gcc.dg/vect/pr109011-4.c: pattern found 3 times
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr109011-4.c scan-tree-dump-times optimized " = .CTZ \\(" 4


Also 

FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr109011-5.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects  scan-tree-dump-times
optimized " = .CLZ \\\\(" 3
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr109011-5.c scan-tree-dump-times optimized " = .CLZ \\\\(" 3


Author: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu Apr 20 11:55:16 2023 +0200

    tree-vect-patterns: Pattern recognize ctz or ffs using clz, popcount or ctz
[PR109011]

[Bug testsuite/109572] new test case gcc.dg/vect/pr109011-4.c from r14-108-g705b0d2b62318b fails

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109572

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |ASSIGNED
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1
           Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org      |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2023-04-21

[Bug testsuite/109572] new test case gcc.dg/vect/pr109011-4.c from r14-108-g705b0d2b62318b fails

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109572

--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek <jakub@gcc.gnu.org>:

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7a0cbaf7f802df209840d78740ffc749dadd1ce3

commit r14-166-g7a0cbaf7f802df209840d78740ffc749dadd1ce3
Author: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Date:   Sat Apr 22 20:16:08 2023 +0200

    testsuite: Fix up pr109011-*.c tests for powerpc [PR109572]

    As reported, pr109011-{4,5}.c tests fail on powerpc.
    I thought they should have the same counts as the corresponding -{2,3}.c
    tests, the only difference is that -{2,3}.c are int while -{4,5}.c are
    long long.  But there are 2 issues.  One is that in the foo
    function the vectorization costs comparison triggered in, while in -{2,3}.c
    we use vectorization factor 4 and it was found beneficial, when using
    long long it was just vf 2 and the scalar cost of doing
    p[i] = __builtin_ctzll (q[i]) twice looked smaller than the vectorizated
    statements.  I could disable the cost model, but instead chose to add
    some further arithmetics to those functions to make it beneficial even
    with vf 2.
    After that change, pr109011-4.c still failed; I was expecting 4 .CTZ calls
    there on power9, 3 vectorized and one in scalar code, but for some reason
    the scalar one didn't trigger.  As I really want to count just the
    vectorized calls, I've added the vect prefix on the variables to ensure
    I'm only counting vectorized calls and decreased the 4 counts to 3.

    2023-04-22  Jakub Jelinek  <jakub@redhat.com>

            PR testsuite/109572
            * gcc.dg/vect/pr109011-1.c: In scan-tree-dump-times regexps match
also
            vect prefix to make sure we only count vectorized calls.
            * gcc.dg/vect/pr109011-2.c: Likewise.  On powerpc* expect just
count 3
            rather than 4.
            * gcc.dg/vect/pr109011-3.c: In scan-tree-dump-times regexps match
also
            vect prefix to make sure we only count vectorized calls.
            * gcc.dg/vect/pr109011-4.c: Likewise.  On powerpc* expect just
count 3
            rather than 4.
            (foo): Add 2 further arithmetic ops to the loop to make it appear
            worthwhile for vectorization heuristics on powerpc.
            * gcc.dg/vect/pr109011-5.c: In scan-tree-dump-times regexps match
also
            vect prefix to make sure we only count vectorized calls.
            (foo): Add 2 further arithmetic ops to the loop to make it appear
            worthwhile for vectorization heuristics on powerpc.

[Bug testsuite/109572] new test case gcc.dg/vect/pr109011-4.c from r14-108-g705b0d2b62318b fails

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109572

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED

--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Should be fixed now.