From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9453 invoked by alias); 20 May 2016 11:25:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 9444 invoked by uid 89); 20 May 2016 11:25:36 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 20 May 2016 11:25:34 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DEF917209D; Fri, 20 May 2016 11:25:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (ovpn-116-88.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.88]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u4KBPUXs031980 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 20 May 2016 07:25:32 -0400 Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id u4KBPTkp026553; Fri, 20 May 2016 13:25:29 +0200 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id u4KBPPoo026552; Fri, 20 May 2016 13:25:25 +0200 Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 11:25:00 -0000 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Richard Biener Cc: Eric Botcazou , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Michael Matz Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] Introduce BIT_FIELD_INSERT Message-ID: <20160520112525.GH28550@tucnak.redhat.com> Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <10155617.0hHYLBiUYX@polaris> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-05/txt/msg01627.txt.bz2 On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 10:59:18AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > Sounds good. I will commit later with your wording. Unfortunately, the new testcase fails e.g. on i?86-*-* or on powerpc*. On i?86-*-* (without -msse) I actually see 2 different issues, one is extra -Wpsabi warnings, and another is the dump scan, the optimization isn't used there at all if we don't have SSE HW. Surprisingly, on powerpc* the only problem is the extra warnings about ABI compatibility, but the scan matches, even if there is no vector support. Similarly on s390* too (and there are no warnings even). So, dunno if we should limit the scan-tree-dump-times only to a few selected arches (e.g. those where we add dg-additional-options for, plus some where it is known to work without additional options, like perhaps aarch64*-*-*, maybe spu*-*-*, what else?). 2016-05-20 Jakub Jelinek PR tree-optimization/29756 gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vector-6.c: Add -Wno-psabi -w to dg-options. Add -msse2 for x86 and -maltivec for powerpc. --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vector-6.c.jj 2016-05-20 12:44:33.000000000 +0200 +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vector-6.c 2016-05-20 13:17:08.730168547 +0200 @@ -1,5 +1,7 @@ /* { dg-do compile } */ -/* { dg-options "-O -fdump-tree-ccp1" } */ +/* { dg-options "-O -fdump-tree-ccp1 -Wno-psabi -w" } */ +/* { dg-additional-options "-msse2" { target i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } } */ +/* { dg-additional-options "-maltivec" { target powerpc_altivec_ok } } */ typedef int v4si __attribute__((vector_size (4 * sizeof (int)))); Jakub