* [PATCH, i386]: Committed: Fix PR target/35496
@ 2008-03-09 13:38 Uros Bizjak
2008-03-09 14:26 ` H.J. Lu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Uros Bizjak @ 2008-03-09 13:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: GCC Patches
Hello!
We have to compute alignment of VECTOR_CST and INTEGER_CST constants via
ALIGN_MODE_128 in the same way as other ALIGN_MODE_128 data is aligned.
2008-03-09 Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>
PR target/35496
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_constant_algnment): Compute alignment
using
ALIGN_MODE_128 for VECTOR_CST and INTEGER_CST in addition to
REAL_CST.
Patch was bootstrapped and regression tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
{,-m32}. Patch is committed to mainline, but I think that it should be
committed to 4.3 branch as well.
Uros.
Index: config/i386/i386.c
===================================================================
--- config/i386/i386.c (revision 133051)
+++ config/i386/i386.c (working copy)
@@ -16789,7 +16789,8 @@
int
ix86_constant_alignment (tree exp, int align)
{
- if (TREE_CODE (exp) == REAL_CST)
+ if (TREE_CODE (exp) == REAL_CST || TREE_CODE (exp) == VECTOR_CST
+ || TREE_CODE (exp) == INTEGER_CST)
{
if (TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (exp)) == DFmode && align < 64)
return 64;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, i386]: Committed: Fix PR target/35496
2008-03-09 13:38 [PATCH, i386]: Committed: Fix PR target/35496 Uros Bizjak
@ 2008-03-09 14:26 ` H.J. Lu
2008-03-09 17:07 ` Uros Bizjak
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: H.J. Lu @ 2008-03-09 14:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Uros Bizjak; +Cc: GCC Patches
On Sun, Mar 9, 2008 at 5:38 AM, Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello!
>
> We have to compute alignment of VECTOR_CST and INTEGER_CST constants via
> ALIGN_MODE_128 in the same way as other ALIGN_MODE_128 data is aligned.
>
> 2008-03-09 Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>
>
> PR target/35496
> * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_constant_algnment): Compute alignment
> using
> ALIGN_MODE_128 for VECTOR_CST and INTEGER_CST in addition to
> REAL_CST.
>
> Patch was bootstrapped and regression tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
> {,-m32}. Patch is committed to mainline, but I think that it should be
> committed to 4.3 branch as well.
>
Can we add a few testcases for Linux/ia32?
H.J.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, i386]: Committed: Fix PR target/35496
2008-03-09 14:26 ` H.J. Lu
@ 2008-03-09 17:07 ` Uros Bizjak
2008-03-09 17:33 ` H.J. Lu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Uros Bizjak @ 2008-03-09 17:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: H.J. Lu; +Cc: GCC Patches
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 677 bytes --]
H.J. Lu wrote:
>> Patch was bootstrapped and regression tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
>> {,-m32}. Patch is committed to mainline, but I think that it should be
>> committed to 4.3 branch as well.
>>
>
> Can we add a few testcases for Linux/ia32?
>
Actually, I have a testcase (attached), that clearly shows the problem
in the asm dump, but it looks that linker somehow fixed this alignment,
so I was not able to fail it (-m32 -O2 -msse2):
.section .rodata
.align 8
.LC0:
.long 1
.long 0
.long 2
.long 0
It looks that this fixup is the reason that the problem went undetected
for so long.
Uros.
[-- Attachment #2: vv.c --]
[-- Type: text/x-csrc, Size: 339 bytes --]
typedef long long __v2di __attribute__ ((__vector_size__ (16)));
typedef union
{
__v2di _v;
long long _a[2];
} __v2di_t;
void abort (void);
static __v2di x = { 1, 2 };
__v2di __attribute__((noinline))
test (void)
{
return x;
}
int main()
{
__v2di_t val;
val._v = test ();
if (val._a[0] + val._a[1] != 3)
abort ();
}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, i386]: Committed: Fix PR target/35496
2008-03-09 17:07 ` Uros Bizjak
@ 2008-03-09 17:33 ` H.J. Lu
2008-03-09 18:40 ` Uros Bizjak
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: H.J. Lu @ 2008-03-09 17:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Uros Bizjak; +Cc: GCC Patches
Hi Uros,
Did you confirm it on Linux with visual inspection?
H.J.
2008/3/9 Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>:
> H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> >> Patch was bootstrapped and regression tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
> >> {,-m32}. Patch is committed to mainline, but I think that it should be
> >> committed to 4.3 branch as well.
> >>
> >
> > Can we add a few testcases for Linux/ia32?
> >
>
> Actually, I have a testcase (attached), that clearly shows the problem
> in the asm dump, but it looks that linker somehow fixed this alignment,
> so I was not able to fail it (-m32 -O2 -msse2):
>
> .section .rodata
> .align 8
> .LC0:
> .long 1
> .long 0
> .long 2
> .long 0
>
> It looks that this fixup is the reason that the problem went undetected
> for so long.
>
> Uros.
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, i386]: Committed: Fix PR target/35496
2008-03-09 17:33 ` H.J. Lu
@ 2008-03-09 18:40 ` Uros Bizjak
2008-03-09 20:17 ` H.J. Lu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Uros Bizjak @ 2008-03-09 18:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: H.J. Lu; +Cc: GCC Patches
H.J. Lu wrote:
> Did you confirm it on Linux with visual inspection?
>
No, fortran testcase failed with -O2 -msse2 -m32.
Uros.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, i386]: Committed: Fix PR target/35496
2008-03-09 18:40 ` Uros Bizjak
@ 2008-03-09 20:17 ` H.J. Lu
2008-03-09 20:53 ` Uros Bizjak
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: H.J. Lu @ 2008-03-09 20:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Uros Bizjak; +Cc: GCC Patches
On Sun, Mar 09, 2008 at 07:39:36PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> H.J. Lu wrote:
>
>> Did you confirm it on Linux with visual inspection?
>>
>
> No, fortran testcase failed with -O2 -msse2 -m32.
Can we create a few Fortran tests with -O2 -msse2 -m32?
H.J.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, i386]: Committed: Fix PR target/35496
2008-03-09 20:17 ` H.J. Lu
@ 2008-03-09 20:53 ` Uros Bizjak
2008-03-10 14:58 ` Kaveh R. GHAZI
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Uros Bizjak @ 2008-03-09 20:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: H.J. Lu; +Cc: GCC Patches
H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> Did you confirm it on Linux with visual inspection?
>>>
>>>
>> No, fortran testcase failed with -O2 -msse2 -m32.
>>
>
> Can we create a few Fortran tests with -O2 -msse2 -m32?
>
No, because fortran testsuite can't detect SSE2 support at runtime. See
fortran vectorizer tests...
Uros.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, i386]: Committed: Fix PR target/35496
2008-03-09 20:53 ` Uros Bizjak
@ 2008-03-10 14:58 ` Kaveh R. GHAZI
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Kaveh R. GHAZI @ 2008-03-10 14:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Uros Bizjak; +Cc: H.J. Lu, GCC Patches
On Sun, 9 Mar 2008, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> >>> Did you confirm it on Linux with visual inspection?
> >>>
> >>>
> >> No, fortran testcase failed with -O2 -msse2 -m32.
> >>
> >
> > Can we create a few Fortran tests with -O2 -msse2 -m32?
> >
>
> No, because fortran testsuite can't detect SSE2 support at runtime. See
> fortran vectorizer tests...
> Uros.
See PRs 34168 & 34878, (hoping someone will fix them...)
Thanks,
--Kaveh
--
Kaveh R. Ghazi ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2008-03-10 14:58 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-03-09 13:38 [PATCH, i386]: Committed: Fix PR target/35496 Uros Bizjak
2008-03-09 14:26 ` H.J. Lu
2008-03-09 17:07 ` Uros Bizjak
2008-03-09 17:33 ` H.J. Lu
2008-03-09 18:40 ` Uros Bizjak
2008-03-09 20:17 ` H.J. Lu
2008-03-09 20:53 ` Uros Bizjak
2008-03-10 14:58 ` Kaveh R. GHAZI
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).