From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9328 invoked by alias); 16 Sep 2015 18:16:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 9315 invoked by uid 89); 16 Sep 2015 18:16:37 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: eu-smtp-delivery-143.mimecast.com Received: from eu-smtp-delivery-143.mimecast.com (HELO eu-smtp-delivery-143.mimecast.com) (146.101.78.143) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 18:16:35 +0000 Received: from cam-owa1.Emea.Arm.com (fw-tnat.cambridge.arm.com [217.140.96.140]) by eu-smtp-1.mimecast.com with ESMTP id uk-mta-21-bHB0lz1jRMaEr-Kv930zCg-1; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 19:16:31 +0100 Received: from e105915-lin.cambridge.arm.com ([10.1.2.79]) by cam-owa1.Emea.Arm.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 16 Sep 2015 19:16:31 +0100 Subject: Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Add expansions for min/max vector reductions To: Bill Schmidt References: <1442413689.2896.45.camel@gnopaine> <55F98AD2.4080408@arm.com> <1442420361.10907.3.camel@gnopaine> Cc: "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" , "dje.gcc@gmail.com" From: Alan Lawrence Message-ID: <55F9B1FE.8000009@arm.com> Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 18:26:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1442420361.10907.3.camel@gnopaine> X-MC-Unique: bHB0lz1jRMaEr-Kv930zCg-1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-09/txt/msg01224.txt.bz2 On 16/09/15 17:19, Bill Schmidt wrote: > On Wed, 2015-09-16 at 16:29 +0100, Alan Lawrence wrote: >> >> I proposed a patch to migrate PPC off the old patterns, but have forgott= en to >> ping it recently - last at >> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-12/msg01024.html ... (ping?!) >> > > Hi Alan, > > Thanks for this patch. I see that you tested it on gcc110, which is a > big-endian platform. I think the pattern for V4SF might have an endian > problem on little-endian, but I'm not positive just eyeballing it. (I > think that the select of element 3 will address the wrong end of the > vector for LE.) Can you please try the patch on gcc112 as well to set > my mind at ease? > > Thanks, > Bill > >> --Alan >> > > I think you are right....I'm just retesting without the patch to rule out o= ther=20 test setup problems etc., but I see more tests failing on gcc112 than I exp= ect=20 (comparing against e.g. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2015-09/msg01479.html). What's the best way to determine endianness - is it BYTES_BIG_ENDIAN, would= that=20 be true on gcc110 but false on gcc112? Cheers, Alan