Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Put dg-options ahead of target selector checks

["Kewen.Lin" <linkw@linux.ibm.com>]

Hi Haochen,

on 2022/8/26 15:29, HAO CHEN GUI wrote:
> Hi,
>   This patch changes the sequence of test directives for 3 cases. Originally,
> these 3 cases got failed or unsupported on some platforms, as their target
> selector checks depend on compiling options.

Maybe it's good to say more in the commit log to make it more clear, like: those
effective target has_arch_* adopt current_compiler_flags in their checks, dg-options
sitting before the dg-require-effective-target will be appended to current_compiler_flags,
but won't if it's after.  So adjusting the location of dg-options to make it more robust,
or something like that.  :)

> 
>   Bootstrapped and tested on powerpc64-linux BE and LE with no regressions.
> Is this okay for trunk? Any recommendations? Thanks a lot.
> 
> Thanks
> Gui Haochen
> 
> ChangeLog
> 2022-08-26  Haochen Gui  <guihaoc@linux.ibm.com>
> 
> rs6000: Change the sequence of test directives for some test cases.  Put
> dg-options ahead of target selector checks as the compiling options affect the
> result of these checks.
> 
> gcc/testsuite/
> 	* gcc.target/powerpc/pr92398.p9+.c: Put dg-options ahead of target
> 	selector check.
> 	* gcc.target/powerpc/pr92398.p9-.c: Likewise.
> 	* gcc.target/powerpc/pr93453-1.c: Likewise.
> 
> 
> patch.diff
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr92398.p9+.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr92398.p9+.c
> index 72dd1d9a274..4e4fad620e8 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr92398.p9+.c
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr92398.p9+.c
> @@ -1,6 +1,8 @@
> -/* { dg-do compile { target { lp64 && has_arch_pwr9 } } } */
> +/* { dg-do compile } */
> +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mdejagnu-cpu=power9 -mvsx" } */

Previously this only gets compiled if has_arch_pwr9, now it's tested always.
I assumed that this change with "-mdejagnu-cpu=power9" is intentional, but
it's unrelated to dg-options things, so maybe it's good to have one note for
this in commit log.

The others look good to me.

BR,
Kewen

> +/* { dg-require-effective-target has_arch_ppc64 } */
> +/* { dg-require-effective-target int128 } */
>  /* { dg-require-effective-target powerpc_vsx_ok } */
> -/* { dg-options "-O2 -mvsx" } */
> 
>  /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mmtvsrdd\M} 1 } } */
>  /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mxxlnor\M} 1 } } */
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr92398.p9-.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr92398.p9-.c
> index bd7fa98af51..4e6a8c8cb8e 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr92398.p9-.c
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr92398.p9-.c
> @@ -1,6 +1,8 @@
> -/* { dg-do compile { target { lp64 && {! has_arch_pwr9} } } } */
> -/* { dg-require-effective-target powerpc_vsx_ok } */
>  /* { dg-options "-O2 -mvsx" } */
> +/* { dg-do compile { target { ! has_arch_pwr9 } } } */
> +/* { dg-require-effective-target int128 } */
> +/* { dg-require-effective-target has_arch_ppc64 } */
> +/* { dg-require-effective-target powerpc_vsx_ok } */
> 
>  /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mnot\M} 2 { xfail be } } } */
>  /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mstd\M} 2 { xfail { { {! has_arch_pwr9} && has_arch_pwr8 } && be } } } } */
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr93453-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr93453-1.c
> index b396458ba12..6f4d899c114 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr93453-1.c
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr93453-1.c
> @@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
> -/* { dg-do compile { target has_arch_ppc64 } } */
> +/* { dg-do compile } */
>  /* { dg-options "-mdejagnu-cpu=power6 -O2" } */
> +/* { dg-require-effective-target has_arch_ppc64 } */
> 
>  unsigned long load_byte_reverse (unsigned long *in)
>  {
>