public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug testsuite/99626] [10/11 regression] gcc.dg/strlenopt-73.c fails for 32 bits Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 15:34:17 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-99626-4-sa6tWBOa07@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-99626-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99626 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> --- Doesn't FAIL on i686-linux. I wonder if it is SLOW_UNALIGNED_ACCESS or something similar that for powerpc64 -m32 causes a lot of memcpy calls not to be folded. grep memcpy strlenopt-73.c.023t.ssa memcpy (pa_41, iftmp.0_21, 17); memcpy (pa_49, iftmp.2_22, 17); memcpy (pa_56, iftmp.4_23, 16); memcpy (pa_63, iftmp.6_24, 15); memcpy (pa_78, iftmp.10_26, 32); memcpy (pa_85, iftmp.12_27, 31); memcpy (pa_92, iftmp.14_28, 30); is the same between i686 and powerpc64 -m64, while for powerpc64 -m32 shows grep memcpy strlenopt-73.c.023t.ssa memcpy (pa_41, iftmp.0_21, 17); memcpy (pa_49, iftmp.2_22, 17); memcpy (pa_56, iftmp.4_23, 16); memcpy (pa_63, iftmp.6_24, 15); memcpy (pa_78, iftmp.10_26, 32); memcpy (pa_85, iftmp.12_27, 31); memcpy (pa_92, iftmp.14_28, 30); memcpy (pa_25, iftmp.20_13, 8); memcpy (pa_33, iftmp.22_14, 8); memcpy (pa_40, iftmp.24_15, 8); memcpy (pa_47, iftmp.26_16, 8); memcpy (pa_54, iftmp.28_17, 8); memcpy (pa_61, iftmp.30_18, 8); The test_copy_cond_unequal_length_i128 has the following misleading comment: #if __i386__ && __SIZEOF_INT128__ == 16 /* The following tests assume GCC transforms the memcpy calls into int128_t assignments which it does only on targets that define the MOVE_MAX macro to 16. That's only s390 and i386 with int128_t support. */ I bet it is never tested, because __int128 isn't supported on 32-bit targets. But __i386__ is defined only on 32-bit x86, so perhaps it meant to use __x86_64__ define instead? And test_copy_cond_unequal_length_i64 is essentially the same except with smaller size, so it again relies on targets transforming the memcpy calls to long long assignments. And there is a lot of targets that define MOVE_MAX to 4 or smaller: config/arc/arc.h:#define MOVE_MAX 4 config/arm/arm.h:#define MOVE_MAX 4 config/c6x/c6x.h:#define MOVE_MAX 4 config/cr16/cr16.h:#define MOVE_MAX 4 config/cris/cris.h:#define MOVE_MAX 4 config/csky/csky.h:#define MOVE_MAX 4 config/ft32/ft32.h:#define MOVE_MAX 4 config/h8300/h8300.h:#define MOVE_MAX 4 config/iq2000/iq2000.h:#define MOVE_MAX 4 config/lm32/lm32.h:#define MOVE_MAX UNITS_PER_WORD config/m32c/m32c.h:#define MOVE_MAX 4 config/m32r/m32r.h:#define MOVE_MAX 4 config/m68k/m68k.h:#define MOVE_MAX 4 config/mcore/mcore.h:#define MOVE_MAX 4 config/microblaze/microblaze.h:#define MOVE_MAX 4 config/mn10300/mn10300.h:#define MOVE_MAX 4 config/moxie/moxie.h:#define MOVE_MAX 4 config/nds32/nds32.h:#define MOVE_MAX 4 config/nios2/nios2.h:#define MOVE_MAX 4 config/or1k/or1k.h:#define MOVE_MAX 4 config/pdp11/pdp11.h:#define MOVE_MAX 2 config/rl78/rl78.h:#define MOVE_MAX 2 config/rs6000/rs6000.h:#define MOVE_MAX (! TARGET_POWERPC64 ? 4 : 8) config/rx/rx.h:#define MOVE_MAX 4 config/sh/sh.h:#define MOVE_MAX (4) config/stormy16/stormy16.h:#define MOVE_MAX 2 config/v850/v850.h:#define MOVE_MAX 4 config/visium/visium.h:#define MOVE_MAX 4 config/xtensa/xtensa.h:#define MOVE_MAX 4 So IMNSHO that function should be compiled only on a couple of targets known to fold memcpy (, , 8); to the assignments.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-17 15:34 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-03-17 14:18 [Bug testsuite/99626] New: " seurer at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-03-17 15:33 ` [Bug testsuite/99626] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-03-17 15:34 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2021-03-18 15:14 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-03-18 15:22 ` [Bug testsuite/99626] [10 Regression] " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-03-19 23:30 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-03-20 8:10 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-99626-4-sa6tWBOa07@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).