From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B14CD3858D32; Thu, 13 Apr 2023 07:42:35 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org B14CD3858D32 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com Received: from pps.filterd (m0098421.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 33D7QP66021824; Thu, 13 Apr 2023 07:42:34 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=message-id : date : mime-version : subject : from : to : cc : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=fOrBd3xHm/tsHazLF53GaubG1qD8ZICg3l/MYHXOZfM=; b=T74uJLV/kw3Lk0iwQJIJSN1Pzv1xuK07rL0Fu6LTg9a9SjR7HHdKLY9sErMDYmVk29HQ eqym7vJ9CQELygON5GvPcGJeAuuE4ppJdSo53GOqAWdUGYakpuBtLbOJlWoLvUSGMgnW LtWejgGXc2xYrjuMFAD9ECasKnWlvr+NFX28q5Y14tb9hNC3XzQJnhkFcaFpqV+DwZE5 XJMAho+RUxWi3aQPHdI5BP01068KmSH0Rcvg5gNIhIVxXWbnHmd4bPb1ElfRmKfjyHy2 Zx5s+y2DNFRNfQa849kaAwD9mXHncLnn+rYDp5RgTZ5y8Gb7hL/gXY9/cusP+1r7vbw7 IQ== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3pxdbr0jj9-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 13 Apr 2023 07:42:34 +0000 Received: from m0098421.ppops.net (m0098421.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 33D7Tag5008065; Thu, 13 Apr 2023 07:42:33 GMT Received: from ppma06fra.de.ibm.com (48.49.7a9f.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [159.122.73.72]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3pxdbr0jh5-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 13 Apr 2023 07:42:33 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma06fra.de.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma06fra.de.ibm.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 33D4H5L8025499; Thu, 13 Apr 2023 07:42:32 GMT Received: from smtprelay01.fra02v.mail.ibm.com ([9.218.2.227]) by ppma06fra.de.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3pu0hq2cw6-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 13 Apr 2023 07:42:31 +0000 Received: from smtpav04.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav04.fra02v.mail.ibm.com [10.20.54.103]) by smtprelay01.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 33D7gSV618088518 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 13 Apr 2023 07:42:28 GMT Received: from smtpav04.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BD6920527; Thu, 13 Apr 2023 07:42:28 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav04.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4255A2051E; Thu, 13 Apr 2023 07:42:19 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.177.24.145] (unknown [9.177.24.145]) by smtpav04.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 13 Apr 2023 07:42:18 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <5324a08b-ce7a-3d56-2ba0-c97e5e1ddd0e@linux.ibm.com> Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2023 15:42:17 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.6.1 Subject: Re: [PATCH] testsuite: update requires for powerpc/float128-cmp2-runnable.c Content-Language: en-US From: "Kewen.Lin" To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: dje.gcc@gmail.com, linkw@gcc.gnu.org, meissner@linux.ibm.com, guojiufu , Segher Boessenkool References: <20230410020941.2440885-1-guojiufu@linux.ibm.com> <11b29ca1-cd23-1a48-4ad8-3b472d38fd2f@linux.ibm.com> <71ed6f665ae2ed9678d8dc4ec0f620ce@linux.ibm.com> <13ec00da-587b-847d-c26b-98cf463f21ac@linux.ibm.com> <20230411151335.GB19790@gate.crashing.org> <7efe959e-2ceb-1aa3-6f83-ecf9ffa35a6f@linux.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <7efe959e-2ceb-1aa3-6f83-ecf9ffa35a6f@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: D1AqMYAd1ZAhvLBmOkT-EiQ4ijORSX0e X-Proofpoint-GUID: GgqnM1k9aJ8qlUEp_9j4FqvLQegBbM1q X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.254,Aquarius:18.0.942,Hydra:6.0.573,FMLib:17.11.170.22 definitions=2023-04-13_04,2023-04-12_01,2023-02-09_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 mlxscore=0 bulkscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 clxscore=1015 spamscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 phishscore=0 priorityscore=1501 impostorscore=0 suspectscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2303200000 definitions=main-2304130068 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-12.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_EF,GIT_PATCH_0,KAM_SHORT,NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: on 2023/4/12 20:47, Kewen.Lin wrote: > Hi Segher & Jeff, > > on 2023/4/11 23:13, Segher Boessenkool wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 05:40:09PM +0800, Kewen.Lin wrote: >>> on 2023/4/11 17:14, guojiufu wrote: >>>> Thanks for raising this concern. >>>> The behavior to check about bif on FLOAT128_HW and emit an error message for >>>> requirements on quad-precision is added in gcc12. This is why gcc12 fails to >>>> compile the case on -m32. >>>> >>>> Before gcc12, altivec_resolve_overloaded_builtin will return the overloaded >>>> result directly, and does not check more about the result function. >>> >>> Thanks for checking, I wonder which commit caused this behavior change and what's >>> the underlying justification? I know there is one new bif handling framework > > Answered this question by myself with some diggings, test case > float128-cmp2-runnable.c started to fail from r12-5752-gd08236359eb229 which > exactly makes new bif framework start to take effect and the reason why the > behavior changes is the condition change from **TARGET_P9_VECTOR** to > **TARGET_FLOAT128_HW**. > > With r12-5751-gc9dd01314d8467 (still old bif framework): > > $ grep -r scalar_cmp_exp_qp gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-builtin.def > BU_P9V_VSX_2 (VSCEQPGT, "scalar_cmp_exp_qp_gt", CONST, xscmpexpqp_gt_kf) > BU_P9V_VSX_2 (VSCEQPLT, "scalar_cmp_exp_qp_lt", CONST, xscmpexpqp_lt_kf) > BU_P9V_VSX_2 (VSCEQPEQ, "scalar_cmp_exp_qp_eq", CONST, xscmpexpqp_eq_kf) > BU_P9V_VSX_2 (VSCEQPUO, "scalar_cmp_exp_qp_unordered", CONST, xscmpexpqp_unordered_kf) > BU_P9V_OVERLOAD_2 (VSCEQPGT, "scalar_cmp_exp_qp_gt") > BU_P9V_OVERLOAD_2 (VSCEQPLT, "scalar_cmp_exp_qp_lt") > BU_P9V_OVERLOAD_2 (VSCEQPEQ, "scalar_cmp_exp_qp_eq") > BU_P9V_OVERLOAD_2 (VSCEQPUO, "scalar_cmp_exp_qp_unordered") > > There were only 13 bifs requiring TARGET_FLOAT128_HW in old bif framework. > > $ grep ^BU_FLOAT128_HW gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-builtin.def > BU_FLOAT128_HW_VSX_1 (VSEEQP, "scalar_extract_expq", CONST, xsxexpqp_kf) > BU_FLOAT128_HW_VSX_1 (VSESQP, "scalar_extract_sigq", CONST, xsxsigqp_kf) > BU_FLOAT128_HW_VSX_1 (VSTDCNQP, "scalar_test_neg_qp", CONST, xststdcnegqp_kf) > BU_FLOAT128_HW_VSX_2 (VSIEQP, "scalar_insert_exp_q", CONST, xsiexpqp_kf) > BU_FLOAT128_HW_VSX_2 (VSIEQPF, "scalar_insert_exp_qp", CONST, xsiexpqpf_kf) > BU_FLOAT128_HW_VSX_2 (VSTDCQP, "scalar_test_data_class_qp", CONST, xststdcqp_kf) > BU_FLOAT128_HW_1 (SQRTF128_ODD, "sqrtf128_round_to_odd", FP, sqrtkf2_odd) > BU_FLOAT128_HW_1 (TRUNCF128_ODD, "truncf128_round_to_odd", FP, trunckfdf2_odd) > BU_FLOAT128_HW_2 (ADDF128_ODD, "addf128_round_to_odd", FP, addkf3_odd) > BU_FLOAT128_HW_2 (SUBF128_ODD, "subf128_round_to_odd", FP, subkf3_odd) > BU_FLOAT128_HW_2 (MULF128_ODD, "mulf128_round_to_odd", FP, mulkf3_odd) > BU_FLOAT128_HW_2 (DIVF128_ODD, "divf128_round_to_odd", FP, divkf3_odd) > BU_FLOAT128_HW_3 (FMAF128_ODD, "fmaf128_round_to_odd", FP, fmakf4_odd) > > Starting from r12-5752-gd08236359eb229, these scalar_cmp_exp_qp_{gt,lt,eq,unordered} > bifs were put under stanza ieee128-hw, it makes ieee128-hw to have 17 bifs, > comparing to the previous, the extra four ones were exactly these > scalar_cmp_exp_qp_{gt,lt,eq,unordered}. > >>> introduced in gcc12, not sure the checking condition was changed together or by >>> a standalone commit. Anyway, apparently the conditions for the support of these >>> bifs are different on gcc-11 and gcc-12, I wonder why it changed. As mentioned >>> above, PR108758's c#1 said this case (bifs) work well on gcc-11, I suspected the >>> condition change was an overkill, that's why I asked. >> >> It almost certainly was an oversight. The new builtin framework changed >> so many things, there was bound to be some breakage to go with all the >> good things it brought. > > Yeah, as the above findings, also I found that r12-3126-g2ed356a4c9af06 introduced > power9 related stanzas and r12-3167-g2f9489a1009d98 introduced ieee128-hw stanza > including these four bifs, both of them don't have any notes on why we would change > the condition for these scalar_cmp_exp_qp_{gt,lt,eq,unordered} from power9-vector to > ieee128-hw, so I think it's just an oversight (ieee128-hw is an overkill comparing > to power9-vector :)). > >> >> So what is the actual thing going wrong? QP insns work fine and are >> valid on all systems and environments, BE or LE, 32-bit or 64-bit. Of >> course you cannot use the "long double" type for those everywhere, but >> that is a very different thing. > > The actual thing going wrong is that: the test case float128-cmp2-runnable.c > runs well on BE -m32 and -m64 with gcc-11, but meets failures on BE -m32 with > latest gcc-12 and trunk during compilation, having the error messages like: > > gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/float128-cmp2-runnable.c: In function 'main': > gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/float128-cmp2-runnable.c:155:3: error: > '__builtin_vsx_scalar_cmp_exp_qp_eq' requires ISA 3.0 IEEE 128-bit floating point > > As scalar_cmp_exp_qp_{gt,lt,eq,unordered} requires condition TARGET_FLOAT128_HW > now (since new bif framework took effect). > > (To be more exact, it started to fail from r12-5752-gd08236359eb229). > > IMHO, the apparent cause seems to be the wrong effective target mismatching the > condition for those bifs, but the underlying cause is that new bif framework > unexpectedly moved these four bifs from power9-vector to ieee128-hw. > I'm going to push the below patch next week if no objections. Bootstrapped and regress-tested on: - powerpc64le-linux-gnu Power10 - powerpc64le-linux-gnu Power9 - powerpc64le-linux-gnu Power8 - powerpc64-linux-gnu Power9 {-m64,-m32} - powerpc64-linux-gnu Power8 {-m64,-m32} BR, Kewen ---------- [PATCH] rs6000: Guard power9-vector for vsx_scalar_cmp_exp_qp_* [PR108758] __builtin_vsx_scalar_cmp_exp_qp_{eq,gt,lt,unordered} used to be guarded with condition TARGET_P9_VECTOR before new bif framework was introduced (r12-5752-gd08236359eb229), since r12-5752 they are placed under stanza ieee128-hw, that is to check condition TARGET_FLOAT128_HW, it caused test case float128-cmp2-runnable.c to fail at -m32 as the condition TARGET_FLOAT128_HW isn't satisfied with -m32. By checking the commit history, I didn't see any notes on why this condition changes on them was made, so this patch is to move these bifs from stanza ieee128-hw to stanza power9-vector as before. It also matches the condition of the corresponding define_insns. PR target/108758 gcc/ChangeLog: * config/rs6000/rs6000-builtins.def (__builtin_vsx_scalar_cmp_exp_qp_eq, __builtin_vsx_scalar_cmp_exp_qp_gt __builtin_vsx_scalar_cmp_exp_qp_lt, __builtin_vsx_scalar_cmp_exp_qp_unordered): Move from stanza ieee128-hw to power9-vector. --- gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-builtins.def | 26 +++++++++++++------------- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) diff --git a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-builtins.def b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-builtins.def index 03fb194b151..67a3f5edaf2 100644 --- a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-builtins.def +++ b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-builtins.def @@ -2797,6 +2797,19 @@ const vsi __builtin_vsx_xxbrw_v4si (vsi); XXBRW_V4SI p9_xxbrw_v4si {} + const signed int __builtin_vsx_scalar_cmp_exp_qp_eq (_Float128, _Float128); + VSCEQPEQ xscmpexpqp_eq_kf {} + + const signed int __builtin_vsx_scalar_cmp_exp_qp_gt (_Float128, _Float128); + VSCEQPGT xscmpexpqp_gt_kf {} + + const signed int __builtin_vsx_scalar_cmp_exp_qp_lt (_Float128, _Float128); + VSCEQPLT xscmpexpqp_lt_kf {} + + const signed int \ + __builtin_vsx_scalar_cmp_exp_qp_unordered (_Float128, _Float128); + VSCEQPUO xscmpexpqp_unordered_kf {} + ; Miscellaneous P9 functions [power9] @@ -2879,19 +2892,6 @@ fpmath _Float128 __builtin_mulf128_round_to_odd (_Float128, _Float128); MULF128_ODD mulkf3_odd {} - const signed int __builtin_vsx_scalar_cmp_exp_qp_eq (_Float128, _Float128); - VSCEQPEQ xscmpexpqp_eq_kf {} - - const signed int __builtin_vsx_scalar_cmp_exp_qp_gt (_Float128, _Float128); - VSCEQPGT xscmpexpqp_gt_kf {} - - const signed int __builtin_vsx_scalar_cmp_exp_qp_lt (_Float128, _Float128); - VSCEQPLT xscmpexpqp_lt_kf {} - - const signed int \ - __builtin_vsx_scalar_cmp_exp_qp_unordered (_Float128, _Float128); - VSCEQPUO xscmpexpqp_unordered_kf {} - fpmath _Float128 __builtin_sqrtf128_round_to_odd (_Float128); SQRTF128_ODD sqrtkf2_odd {} -- 2.39.1