From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-460595-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 53875 invoked by alias); 18 Aug 2017 21:31:05 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 51488 invoked by uid 89); 18 Aug 2017 21:31:00 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-15.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,GIT_PATCH_1,GIT_PATCH_2,GIT_PATCH_3,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=
X-HELO: gate.crashing.org
Received: from gate.crashing.org (HELO gate.crashing.org) (63.228.1.57) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 18 Aug 2017 21:30:58 +0000
Received: from gate.crashing.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])	by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.13.8) with ESMTP id v7ILUrav028243;	Fri, 18 Aug 2017 16:30:53 -0500
Received: (from segher@localhost)	by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id v7ILUo2N028240;	Fri, 18 Aug 2017 16:30:50 -0500
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2017 23:28:00 -0000
From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Will Schmidt <will_schmidt@vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>, "Carl E. Love" <cel@us.ibm.com>,        Bill Schmidt <wschmidt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,        David Edelsohn <dje.gcc@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH, rs6000] testcase coverage for vec_perm built-ins
Message-ID: <20170818213049.GN13471@gate.crashing.org>
References: <1502979563.14827.10.camel@brimstone.rchland.ibm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1502979563.14827.10.camel@brimstone.rchland.ibm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2017-08/txt/msg01158.txt.bz2

Hi Will,

On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 09:19:23AM -0500, Will Schmidt wrote:
> Add some Testcase coverage for the vector permute intrinsics.
> 
> Tested across power platforms.  OK for trunk?

> 	* gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-perm-char.c: New.
> 	* gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-perm-double.c: New.
> 	* gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-perm-float.c: New.
> 	* gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-perm-int.c: New.
> 	* gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-perm-longlong.c: New.
> 	* gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-perm-pixel.c: New.
> 	* gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-perm-short.c: New.

> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-perm-double.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
> +/* Verify that overloaded built-ins for vec_perm with 
> +   double inputs produce the right results.  */

That suggests it is a run test, but it's not.  s/results/code/ maybe?
(Same in other tests).

> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-perm-float.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
> +/* Verify that overloaded built-ins for vec_perm with float
> +   inputs produce the right results.  */
> +
> +/* { dg-do compile } */
> +/* { dg-require-effective-target powerpc_vsx_ok } */
> +/* { dg-options "-maltivec -O2" } */

vsx vs. altivec again.  You probably just need to add a comment what this
is about, or you can use -mvsx instead.

> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..9f5c786
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-perm-pixel.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
> +/* Verify that overloaded built-ins for vec_perm with pixel
> +   inputs produce the right results.  */
> +
> +/* { dg-do compile } */
> +/* { dg-require-effective-target powerpc_vsx_ok } */
> +/* { dg-options "-mvsx -O2" } */

Why vsx for pixel?  It's an altivec thing.


Segher