From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3761385C017 for ; Mon, 26 Jul 2021 21:04:35 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org B3761385C017 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.crashing.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=kernel.crashing.org Received: from gate.crashing.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id 16QL3Y97023648; Mon, 26 Jul 2021 16:03:34 -0500 Received: (from segher@localhost) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id 16QL3Y0E023647; Mon, 26 Jul 2021 16:03:34 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: gate.crashing.org: segher set sender to segher@kernel.crashing.org using -f Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2021 16:03:34 -0500 From: Segher Boessenkool To: Michael Meissner , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, David Edelsohn , Bill Schmidt , Peter Bergner , Will Schmidt Subject: Re: Repost #2: [PATCH] PR 100170: Fix eq/ne tests on power10. Message-ID: <20210726210333.GS1583@gate.crashing.org> References: <20210714175205.GA4593@ibm-toto.the-meissners.org> <20210714212206.GE1583@gate.crashing.org> <20210726204646.GA5198@ibm-toto.the-meissners.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210726204646.GA5198@ibm-toto.the-meissners.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, KAM_SHORT, TXREP, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR, T_SPF_PERMERROR autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2021 21:04:38 -0000 On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 04:46:46PM -0400, Michael Meissner wrote: > On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 04:22:06PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/ppc-ne0-1.c > > > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/ppc-ne0-1.c > > > > > -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "addic" 4 } } */ > > > -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "subfe" 1 } } */ > > > -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "addze" 3 } } */ > > > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\maddic\M} 4 { target { ! has_arch_pwr10 } } } } */ > > > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\msubfe\M} 1 { target { ! has_arch_pwr10 } } } } */ > > > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\maddic\M} 3 { target { has_arch_pwr10 } } } } */ > > > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not {\msubfe\M} { target { has_arch_pwr10 } } } } */ > > > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\msetbcr\M} 1 { target { has_arch_pwr10 } } } } */ > > > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\maddze\M} 3 } } */ > > > > It may be easier to split the patch into two, where one part can get the > > setbcr (the first, simplest function), and the rest stays the same. > > I really don't understand this comment. I don't see how you could split the > patch in two, as the function that generates the setbcr (ne0) for power10 would > generate addic/subfe instead of the setbcr on earlier power systems. Those > instruction counts have to be changed for the other functions. So it doesn't > make sense to split the patch to me. I'm sorry. I meant split the *testcase* into two :-) One with the first test, the other with the rest. Segher