Re: [PATCHv5] Fix not 8-byte aligned ldrd/strd on ARMv5 (PR 89544)

["Richard Earnshaw (lists)" <Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com>]

On 06/09/2019 11:15, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> On 9/4/19 2:53 PM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
>> Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/unaligned-argument-2.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/unaligned-argument-2.c    (Revision 0)
>> +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/unaligned-argument-2.c    (Arbeitskopie)
>> @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
>> +/* { dg-do compile } */
>> +/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_arm_ok } */
>> +/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_ldrd_strd_ok } */
>> +/* { dg-options "-marm -mno-unaligned-access -O3" } */
>> +
>> +struct s {
>> +  int a, b;
>> +} __attribute__((aligned(8)));
>> +
>> +struct s f0;
>> +
>> +void f(int a, int b, int c, int d, int e, struct s f)
>> +{
>> +  f0 = f;
>> +}
>> +
>> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldrd" 0 } } */
>> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "strd" 0 } } */
>> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "stm" 1 } } */
>>
>> I don't think this test is right.  While we can't use an LDRD to load the argument off the stack, there's nothing wrong with using an STRD to then store the value to f0 (as that is 8-byte aligned).  So the second and third scan-assembler tests are meaningless.
>>
>> R.
>>
>> (sorry, just noticed this).
> 
> So, agreed, that is really likely to change.
> I would just remove those, as attached.
> 
> Is that OK for trunk?
> 
> 
> Thanks
> Bernd.
> 

OK.

R.