public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH] rs6000: Update instruction counts due to combine changes [PR112103]
@ 2024-02-19 22:35 Peter Bergner
  2024-02-20  9:29 ` Kewen.Lin
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Peter Bergner @ 2024-02-19 22:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Segher Boessenkool, Kewen.Lin, David Edelsohn; +Cc: GCC Patches

rs6000: Update instruction counts due to combine changes [PR112103]

The PR91865 combine fix changed instruction counts slightly for rlwinm-0.c.
Adjust expected instruction counts accordingly.

This passed on both powerpc64le-linux and powerpc64-linux running the
testsuite in both 32-bit and 64-bit modes.  Ok for trunk?

FYI, I will open a new bug to track the removing of the superfluous
insns detected in PR112103.


Peter


gcc/testsuite/
	PR target/112103
	* gcc.target/powerpc/rlwinm-0.c: Adjust expected instruction counts.

diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rlwinm-0.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rlwinm-0.c
index 4f4fca2d8ef..a10d9174306 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rlwinm-0.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rlwinm-0.c
@@ -4,10 +4,10 @@
 /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {(?n)^\s+[a-z]} 6739 { target ilp32 } } } */
 /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {(?n)^\s+[a-z]} 9716 { target lp64 } } } */
 /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {(?n)^\s+blr} 3375 } } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {(?n)^\s+rldicl} 3081 { target lp64 } } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {(?n)^\s+rldicl} 3090 { target lp64 } } } */
 
 /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {(?n)^\s+rlwinm} 3197 { target ilp32 } } } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {(?n)^\s+rlwinm} 3093 { target lp64 } } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {(?n)^\s+rlwinm} 3084 { target lp64 } } } */
 /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {(?n)^\s+rotlwi} 154 } } */
 /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {(?n)^\s+srwi} 13 { target ilp32 } } } */
 /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {(?n)^\s+srdi} 13 { target lp64 } } } */

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] rs6000: Update instruction counts due to combine changes [PR112103]
  2024-02-19 22:35 [PATCH] rs6000: Update instruction counts due to combine changes [PR112103] Peter Bergner
@ 2024-02-20  9:29 ` Kewen.Lin
  2024-02-20 19:49   ` Peter Bergner
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Kewen.Lin @ 2024-02-20  9:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Peter Bergner; +Cc: GCC Patches, Segher Boessenkool, David Edelsohn

Hi Peter,

on 2024/2/20 06:35, Peter Bergner wrote:
> rs6000: Update instruction counts due to combine changes [PR112103]
> 
> The PR91865 combine fix changed instruction counts slightly for rlwinm-0.c.
> Adjust expected instruction counts accordingly.
> 
> This passed on both powerpc64le-linux and powerpc64-linux running the
> testsuite in both 32-bit and 64-bit modes.  Ok for trunk?

OK for trunk, thanks for fixing!

> 
> FYI, I will open a new bug to track the removing of the superfluous
> insns detected in PR112103.

Hope this test case will become not fragile any more once this filed
issue gets fixed. :)

BR,
Kewen

> 
> 
> Peter
> 
> 
> gcc/testsuite/
> 	PR target/112103
> 	* gcc.target/powerpc/rlwinm-0.c: Adjust expected instruction counts.
> 
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rlwinm-0.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rlwinm-0.c
> index 4f4fca2d8ef..a10d9174306 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rlwinm-0.c
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rlwinm-0.c
> @@ -4,10 +4,10 @@
>  /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {(?n)^\s+[a-z]} 6739 { target ilp32 } } } */
>  /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {(?n)^\s+[a-z]} 9716 { target lp64 } } } */
>  /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {(?n)^\s+blr} 3375 } } */
> -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {(?n)^\s+rldicl} 3081 { target lp64 } } } */
> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {(?n)^\s+rldicl} 3090 { target lp64 } } } */
>  
>  /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {(?n)^\s+rlwinm} 3197 { target ilp32 } } } */
> -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {(?n)^\s+rlwinm} 3093 { target lp64 } } } */
> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {(?n)^\s+rlwinm} 3084 { target lp64 } } } */
>  /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {(?n)^\s+rotlwi} 154 } } */
>  /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {(?n)^\s+srwi} 13 { target ilp32 } } } */
>  /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {(?n)^\s+srdi} 13 { target lp64 } } } */


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] rs6000: Update instruction counts due to combine changes [PR112103]
  2024-02-20  9:29 ` Kewen.Lin
@ 2024-02-20 19:49   ` Peter Bergner
  2024-02-20 22:46     ` Segher Boessenkool
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Peter Bergner @ 2024-02-20 19:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Kewen.Lin; +Cc: GCC Patches, Segher Boessenkool, David Edelsohn

On 2/20/24 3:29 AM, Kewen.Lin wrote:
> on 2024/2/20 06:35, Peter Bergner wrote:
>> rs6000: Update instruction counts due to combine changes [PR112103]
>>
>> The PR91865 combine fix changed instruction counts slightly for rlwinm-0.c.
>> Adjust expected instruction counts accordingly.
>>
>> This passed on both powerpc64le-linux and powerpc64-linux running the
>> testsuite in both 32-bit and 64-bit modes.  Ok for trunk?
> 
> OK for trunk, thanks for fixing!

Ok, pushed.  Thanks.


>> FYI, I will open a new bug to track the removing of the superfluous
>> insns detected in PR112103.
> 
> Hope this test case will become not fragile any more once this filed
> issue gets fixed. :)

I think this will become less fragile after we fix PR114004 which is
the bug I opened to track fixing the superfluous insn that was emitted
that we found in this bug.  The fragility was due to the superfluous
insn being different before and after Roger's patch.  Once we don't
emit it anymore, this test case should be less fragile.

Peter


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] rs6000: Update instruction counts due to combine changes [PR112103]
  2024-02-20 19:49   ` Peter Bergner
@ 2024-02-20 22:46     ` Segher Boessenkool
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Segher Boessenkool @ 2024-02-20 22:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Peter Bergner; +Cc: Kewen.Lin, GCC Patches, David Edelsohn

On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 01:49:30PM -0600, Peter Bergner wrote:
> I think this will become less fragile after we fix PR114004 which is

You call it "fragile".  I call it the testcase found the exact kind of
bug this testcase was meant to find!

Yes, the test should become quieter when the compiler has fewer bugs :-)


Segher

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2024-02-20 22:47 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2024-02-19 22:35 [PATCH] rs6000: Update instruction counts due to combine changes [PR112103] Peter Bergner
2024-02-20  9:29 ` Kewen.Lin
2024-02-20 19:49   ` Peter Bergner
2024-02-20 22:46     ` Segher Boessenkool

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).