* [Bug middle-end/50704] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/warn-vect-op-1.c
2011-10-12 15:39 [Bug middle-end/50704] New: FAIL: gcc.target/i386/warn-vect-op-1.c hjl.tools at gmail dot com
@ 2011-10-12 15:45 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
2011-10-12 16:57 ` tema at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr @ 2011-10-12 15:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50704
Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2011-10-12
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> 2011-10-12 15:44:56 UTC ---
Confirmed on x86_64-apple-darwin10with -m32:
/opt/gcc/work/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/warn-vect-op-1.c:15:8: warning:
vector operation will be expanded piecewise [-Wvector-operation-performance]
/opt/gcc/work/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/warn-vect-op-3.c:12:8: warning:
vector operation will be expanded piecewise [-Wvector-operation-performance]
/opt/gcc/work/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/warn-vect-op-3.c:13:8: warning:
vector operation will be expanded piecewise [-Wvector-operation-performance]
i.e., 'piecewise' instead of 'parallel'.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/50704] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/warn-vect-op-1.c
2011-10-12 15:39 [Bug middle-end/50704] New: FAIL: gcc.target/i386/warn-vect-op-1.c hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-10-12 15:45 ` [Bug middle-end/50704] " dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
@ 2011-10-12 16:57 ` tema at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-12 17:02 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (8 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: tema at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-10-12 16:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50704
Artem Shinkarov <tema at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |tema at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Artem Shinkarov <tema at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-10-12 16:56:59 UTC ---
Ah! It happens because the underlying architecture is 32-bit. We should run
these tests only on 64-bit architectures to get the correct warnings. So I'll
add /* { dg-require-effective-target lp64 } */ option.
By the way, is it a correct option to disable running the test on 32-bit archs?
Artem.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/50704] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/warn-vect-op-1.c
2011-10-12 15:39 [Bug middle-end/50704] New: FAIL: gcc.target/i386/warn-vect-op-1.c hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-10-12 15:45 ` [Bug middle-end/50704] " dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
2011-10-12 16:57 ` tema at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-10-12 17:02 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-10-12 17:03 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (7 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: hjl.tools at gmail dot com @ 2011-10-12 17:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50704
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> 2011-10-12 17:01:27 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > Ah! It happens because the underlying architecture is 32-bit. We should run
> > these tests only on 64-bit architectures to get the correct warnings. So I'll
> > add /* { dg-require-effective-target lp64 } */ option.
> >
> > By the way, is it a correct option to disable running the test on 32-bit archs?
> >
> >
>
> X86 supports ia32, x32 and lp64. I think you want to run it for x32 and
> lp32.
I meant "x32 and lp64".
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/50704] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/warn-vect-op-1.c
2011-10-12 15:39 [Bug middle-end/50704] New: FAIL: gcc.target/i386/warn-vect-op-1.c hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2011-10-12 17:02 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
@ 2011-10-12 17:03 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-10-12 17:04 ` tema at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: hjl.tools at gmail dot com @ 2011-10-12 17:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50704
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> 2011-10-12 17:00:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Ah! It happens because the underlying architecture is 32-bit. We should run
> these tests only on 64-bit architectures to get the correct warnings. So I'll
> add /* { dg-require-effective-target lp64 } */ option.
>
> By the way, is it a correct option to disable running the test on 32-bit archs?
>
>
X86 supports ia32, x32 and lp64. I think you want to run it for x32 and
lp32.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/50704] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/warn-vect-op-1.c
2011-10-12 15:39 [Bug middle-end/50704] New: FAIL: gcc.target/i386/warn-vect-op-1.c hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2011-10-12 17:03 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
@ 2011-10-12 17:04 ` tema at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-12 17:36 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (5 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: tema at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-10-12 17:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50704
--- Comment #5 from Artem Shinkarov <tema at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-10-12 17:03:46 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > (In reply to comment #2)
> > > Ah! It happens because the underlying architecture is 32-bit. We should run
> > > these tests only on 64-bit architectures to get the correct warnings. So I'll
> > > add /* { dg-require-effective-target lp64 } */ option.
> > >
> > > By the way, is it a correct option to disable running the test on 32-bit archs?
> > >
> > >
> >
> > X86 supports ia32, x32 and lp64. I think you want to run it for x32 and
> > lp32.
>
> I meant "x32 and lp64".
So if I want to run the test only on 64-bit architectures, then lp64 is the
correct choice in dg-require-effective-target?
Artem.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/50704] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/warn-vect-op-1.c
2011-10-12 15:39 [Bug middle-end/50704] New: FAIL: gcc.target/i386/warn-vect-op-1.c hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2011-10-12 17:04 ` tema at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-10-12 17:36 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-10-12 17:45 ` tema at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: hjl.tools at gmail dot com @ 2011-10-12 17:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50704
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> 2011-10-12 17:36:05 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
>
> So if I want to run the test only on 64-bit architectures, then lp64 is the
> correct choice in dg-require-effective-target?
>
> Artem.
x32 also has 64bit registers. You should use
/* { dg-do compile { target { ! { ia32 } } } } */
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/50704] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/warn-vect-op-1.c
2011-10-12 15:39 [Bug middle-end/50704] New: FAIL: gcc.target/i386/warn-vect-op-1.c hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2011-10-12 17:36 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
@ 2011-10-12 17:45 ` tema at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-12 17:58 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (3 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: tema at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-10-12 17:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50704
--- Comment #7 from Artem Shinkarov <tema at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-10-12 17:45:14 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> >
> > So if I want to run the test only on 64-bit architectures, then lp64 is the
> > correct choice in dg-require-effective-target?
> >
> > Artem.
>
> x32 also has 64bit registers. You should use
>
> /* { dg-do compile { target { ! { ia32 } } } } */
I need to make sure that UNITS_PER_WORD is 8 on the architecture I am running
the test. Is it the case for x32?
Thanks,
Artem.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/50704] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/warn-vect-op-1.c
2011-10-12 15:39 [Bug middle-end/50704] New: FAIL: gcc.target/i386/warn-vect-op-1.c hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2011-10-12 17:45 ` tema at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-10-12 17:58 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2011-10-14 15:40 ` tema at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: hjl.tools at gmail dot com @ 2011-10-12 17:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50704
--- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> 2011-10-12 17:58:19 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
>
> I need to make sure that UNITS_PER_WORD is 8 on the architecture I am running
> the test. Is it the case for x32?
>
Yes.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/50704] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/warn-vect-op-1.c
2011-10-12 15:39 [Bug middle-end/50704] New: FAIL: gcc.target/i386/warn-vect-op-1.c hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2011-10-12 17:58 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
@ 2011-10-14 15:40 ` tema at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-09-02 9:06 ` [Bug testsuite/50704] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-09-02 9:06 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: tema at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-10-14 15:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50704
--- Comment #9 from Artem Shinkarov <tema at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-10-14 15:39:56 UTC ---
The problem should be fixed with 179991. Anyone running 32-bit architectures,
please confirm.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* [Bug testsuite/50704] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/warn-vect-op-1.c
2011-10-12 15:39 [Bug middle-end/50704] New: FAIL: gcc.target/i386/warn-vect-op-1.c hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2011-10-14 15:40 ` tema at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-09-02 9:06 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-09-02 9:06 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-09-02 9:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50704
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Component|middle-end |testsuite
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed by r0-112415.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* [Bug testsuite/50704] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/warn-vect-op-1.c
2011-10-12 15:39 [Bug middle-end/50704] New: FAIL: gcc.target/i386/warn-vect-op-1.c hjl.tools at gmail dot com
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2021-09-02 9:06 ` [Bug testsuite/50704] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-09-02 9:06 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-09-02 9:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50704
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread