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 87CA53858D28 for ; Tue, 12 Apr 2022 18:06:11 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 87CA53858D28 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 23CI48pX017125; Tue, 12 Apr 2022 13:04:08 -0500 Received: (from segher@localhost) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id 23CI47Lc017124; Tue, 12 Apr 2022 13:04:07 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: gate.crashing.org: segher set sender to segher@kernel.crashing.org using -f Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2022 13:04:07 -0500 From: Segher Boessenkool To: Alexandre Oliva Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, David Edelsohn Subject: Re: [PATCH] ppc: testsuite: test for arch_pwr7 with -mvsx in fold-vec-insert-double Message-ID: <20220412180407.GD614@gate.crashing.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, KAM_SHORT, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE 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: Tue, 12 Apr 2022 18:06:16 -0000 On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 08:59:41PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > > gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-insert-double.c is compiled with -mvsx, > while the expected asm output depends on target has_arch_pwr7, which > is tested for without -mvsx. > > In some of our configurations, that have altivec and vsx disabled by > default, the former defines up to _ARCH_PWR7, while the latter defines > only up to _ARCH_PWR4, i.e., we compile for power7, and test for > non-power7. You cannot use -mvsx if you do not have -mcpu=power7 (or higher). If -mvsx is allowed (i.e. when powerpc_vsx_ok is satisfied) you always are compiling for power7 or higher. What goes wrong? Segher