From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57])
 by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADB6D3857C43
 for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Fri, 26 Nov 2021 17:48:00 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org ADB6D3857C43
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none)
 header.from=kernel.crashing.org
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org;
 spf=pass 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 1AQHl0cY010349;
 Fri, 26 Nov 2021 11:47:00 -0600
Received: (from segher@localhost)
 by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id 1AQHkx9D010348;
 Fri, 26 Nov 2021 11:46:59 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: gate.crashing.org: segher set sender to
 segher@kernel.crashing.org using -f
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2021 11:46:59 -0600
From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Bill Schmidt <wschmidt@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>, David Edelsohn <dje.gcc@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH, committed] rs6000: Fix test_mffsl.c effective target check
Message-ID: <20211126174659.GS614@gate.crashing.org>
References: <7dd2d61c-7f29-6d03-2f61-35eed745bc0a@linux.ibm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <7dd2d61c-7f29-6d03-2f61-35eed745bc0a@linux.ibm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL,
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS, KAM_SHORT, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS,
 TXREP 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 <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-patches>,
 <mailto:gcc-patches-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-patches>,
 <mailto:gcc-patches-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2021 17:48:01 -0000

Hi!

On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 01:14:05PM -0600, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> Paul Clarke pointed out to me that I had wrongly used a compile-time check
> instead of a run-time check in this executable test.  This patch fixes
> that.  I also fixed a typo in a string that caught my eye.
> 
> Tested on powerpc64le-linux-gnu, committed as obvious.

Thanks.

> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/test_mffsl.c
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/test_mffsl.c
> @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
>  /* { dg-do run { target { powerpc*-*-* } } } */

(The target clause is redundant fwiw, feel free to remove it).

>  /* { dg-options "-O2 -std=c99 -mcpu=power9" } */
> -/* { dg-require-effective-target powerpc_p9vector_ok } */
> +/* { dg-require-effective-target p9vector_hw } */

This selector doesn't make too much sense, since nothing in here
requires vectors at all.  p9modulo_hw makes more sense.  Except the
name of that should just be power9_hw :-)

The OS can disallow vector insns (MSR[VEC] and/or MSR[VSX]), so
p9vector_hw tests it isn't doing that, and that the hardware is a p9.
p9modulo_hw does only the latter, and we have no reason to check
separately if we can run modulo insns anyway :-)

So please change the test here.  And bonus points if you can rename
p9modulo_hw and _ok (in a separate patch of course).


Segher