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 8109B3858C60; Wed, 13 Oct 2021 01:59:41 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 8109B3858C60 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098417.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 19D1VmKg014840; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 21:59:41 -0400 Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3bnnvfgd5v-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 12 Oct 2021 21:59:40 -0400 Received: from m0098417.ppops.net (m0098417.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 19D1j1rY002709; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 21:59:40 -0400 Received: from ppma03ams.nl.ibm.com (62.31.33a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.51.49.98]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3bnnvfgd5b-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 12 Oct 2021 21:59:40 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma03ams.nl.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma03ams.nl.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 19D1vRLU018300; Wed, 13 Oct 2021 01:59:38 GMT Received: from b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay13.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.198]) by ppma03ams.nl.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3bk2q9p04y-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 13 Oct 2021 01:59:38 +0000 Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.60]) by b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 19D1xaue49283548 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 13 Oct 2021 01:59:36 GMT Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 254C34203F; Wed, 13 Oct 2021 01:59:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5277342042; Wed, 13 Oct 2021 01:59:34 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.200.154.17] (unknown [9.200.154.17]) by d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Wed, 13 Oct 2021 01:59:34 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <82761479-4b61-bea7-e4ec-1e7a787139b8@linux.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2021 09:59:31 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.2.0 Subject: Re: Ping ^ 2: [PATCH] rs6000: Remove unspecs for vec_mrghl[bhw] Content-Language: en-US To: David Edelsohn Cc: Segher Boessenkool , GCC Patches , Bill Schmidt , linkw@gcc.gnu.org References: <20210524090213.2813103-1-luoxhu@linux.ibm.com> <20210608232543.GC18427@gate.crashing.org> <7daea8f2-c0f4-f2e0-eca1-6cfc7496600d@linux.ibm.com> <7bce16f3-ab02-b26f-57d1-c9da93b9f7b8@linux.ibm.com> From: Xionghu Luo In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: F02U6ptL4HuNV4Ofa_CMy_KNzhAnU6jr X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: UrG-POqaBxeDRBnKIatkYsmQat6wlNmz Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Proofpoint-UnRewURL: 0 URL was un-rewritten MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.182.1,Aquarius:18.0.790,Hydra:6.0.425,FMLib:17.0.607.475 definitions=2021-10-12_07,2021-10-12_01,2020-04-07_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 clxscore=1015 mlxlogscore=999 bulkscore=0 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 mlxscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 priorityscore=1501 spamscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2109230001 definitions=main-2110130007 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_EF, KAM_SHORT, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2021 01:59:42 -0000 Thanks David, On 2021/10/13 06:51, David Edelsohn wrote: > Hi, Xionghu > > What's the status of the \M and \m testcase beautification requested > by Segher? Did you send an updated patch? Your messages ping the > version prior to Segher's additional comments. The pinged link already answered Segher's questions and included a patch pasted in it. To follow Segher's preference ;), I just post a v2 patch here: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-October/581497.html \M and \m are actually not quite necessary to the testcase gcc.target/powerpc/builtins-1.c since it is built with "-mdejagnu-cpu=power8 -O0 -mno-fold-gimple -dp", so the testcase also counts the generated instruction patterns. > > It seems that the changes to the patterns are complete, but there are > remaining questions about the testcase style and if the instruction > counts are ideal. I trust that the instruction counts match the > behavior after the patch, but it seemed that Segher wanted to confirm > that the counts are the values desired / expected from optimal code > generation. The counts are the total for the file, which doesn't > communicate if the sequences themselves are optimal. Will rebase and retest after Segher's review of the v2 patch. -- Thanks, Xionghu