public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Kewen.Lin" <linkw@linux.ibm.com>
To: Alexandre Oliva <oliva@adacore.com>
Cc: Rainer Orth <ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>,
	Mike Stump <mikestump@comcast.net>,
	David Edelsohn <dje.gcc@gmail.com>,
	Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Kewen Lin <linkw@gcc.gnu.org>,
	gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] adjust vectorization expectations for ppc costmodel 76b
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2024 16:56:46 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1ea56d29-4845-e364-e39b-f2f51afc0bbb@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <or8r0wfzs7.fsf@lxoliva.fsfla.org>

on 2024/4/29 14:28, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Apr 28, 2024, "Kewen.Lin" <linkw@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
>> Nit: Maybe add a prefix "testsuite: ".
> 
> ACK
> 
>>>
>>> From: Kewen Lin <linkw@linux.ibm.com>
> 
>> Thanks, you can just drop this.  :)
> 
> I've turned it into Co-Authored-By, since you insist.
> 
> But unfortunately with the patch it still fails when testing for
> -mcpu=power7 on ppc64le-linux-gnu: it does vectorize the loop with 13
> iterations.  We need 16 iterations, as in an earlier version of this
> test, for it to pass for -mcpu=power7, but then it doesn't pass for
> -mcpu=power6.
> 
> It looks like we're going to have to adjust the expectations.
> 

I had a look at the failure, it's due to that "vect_no_align" is
evaluated as true unexpectedly.

  "selector_expression: ` vect_no_align || {! vector_alignment_reachable} ' 1"

Currently powerpc* checks check_p8vector_hw_available, ppc64le-linux-gnu
has at least Power8 support (that is testing machine supports p8vector run),
so it concludes vect_no_align is true.

proc check_effective_target_vect_no_align { } {
    return [check_cached_effective_target_indexed vect_no_align {
      expr { [istarget mipsisa64*-*-*]
	     || [istarget mips-sde-elf]
	     || [istarget sparc*-*-*]
	     || [istarget ia64-*-*]
	     || [check_effective_target_arm_vect_no_misalign]
	     || ([istarget powerpc*-*-*] && [check_p8vector_hw_available])

I'll fix this in PR113535 which was filed previously for visiting powerpc
specific check in these vect* effective targets.  If the testing just goes
with native cpu type, this issue will become invisible.  I think you can
still push the patch as the testing just exposes another issue.

BR,
Kewen


  reply	other threads:[~2024-04-29  8:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-03-10  9:12 Alexandre Oliva
2024-04-22  9:28 ` [PATCH] " Alexandre Oliva
2024-04-24  8:24   ` Kewen.Lin
2024-04-28  8:14     ` Alexandre Oliva
2024-04-28  9:31       ` Kewen.Lin
2024-04-29  6:28         ` Alexandre Oliva
2024-04-29  8:56           ` Kewen.Lin [this message]
2024-05-23 13:22             ` Alexandre Oliva
2024-05-24 11:34               ` Alexandre Oliva

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=1ea56d29-4845-e364-e39b-f2f51afc0bbb@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=linkw@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=dje.gcc@gmail.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=linkw@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=mikestump@comcast.net \
    --cc=oliva@adacore.com \
    --cc=ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE \
    --cc=segher@kernel.crashing.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: link
Be 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).