Sorry I made a mistake here. Does it work for you ? /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorizing stmts using SLP" 2 "vect" { target { { vect_hw_misalign } && { ! vect512 } } } } } */ /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorizing stmts using SLP" 4 "vect" { target { vect512 } } } } */ Tested on RVV is OK. juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai From: Andrew Stubbs Date: 2023-11-07 19:44 To: juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai; gcc-patches CC: jeffreyalaw; rguenther Subject: Re: [PATCH] test: Fix FAIL of pr97428.c for RVV On 07/11/2023 11:24, juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai wrote: > Oh. Sorry maybe it's better like this: > > /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorizing stmts using SLP" 2 > "vect" { target { { ! vect_hw_misalign } || { vect512 } } } } } */ > /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorizing stmts using SLP" 4 > "vect" { target{ ! vect512 } } } } */ The conditions are backwards; this expects vect512 machines to match twice. Also I think there's a space missing. Andrew > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai > > *From:* juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai > *Date:* 2023-11-07 19:23 > *To:* ams ; gcc-patches > > *CC:* jeffreyalaw ; rguenther > > *Subject:* Re: Re: [PATCH] test: Fix FAIL of pr97428.c for RVV > Do you mean this ? > > /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorizing stmts using SLP" 2 > "vect" { target { { ! vect_hw_misalign } || { vect512 } } } } } */ > /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorizing stmts using SLP" 4 > "vect" { xfail { ! vect512 } } } } */ > > Could you try again ? If it works for you, I am gonna send V2 patch > to Richi. > > Thank you so much for help. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai > > *From:* Andrew Stubbs > *Date:* 2023-11-07 19:21 > *To:* juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai ; > gcc-patches > *CC:* jeffreyalaw ; rguenther > > *Subject:* Re: [PATCH] test: Fix FAIL of pr97428.c for RVV > On 07/11/2023 11:05, juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai wrote: > > Could you try this ? > > > > /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorizing stmts using > SLP" 2 > > "vect" { xfail { { ! vect_hw_misalign } || { vect512 } } } } } */ > > /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorizing stmts using > SLP" 4 > > "vect" { xfail { ! vect512 } } } } */ > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c (test for excess errors) > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump vect "Detected > interleaving > load of size 8" > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump vect "Detected > interleaving > store of size 16" > gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c: pattern found 4 times > XFAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorizing > stmts using SLP" 2 > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump-times vect > "vectorizing stmts > using SLP" 4 > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump-not vect "gap of 6 > elements" > The passes are all correct (assuming that 4 matches are a valid > number), > but if you have mutliple patterns with contractictory > expectations then > you probably want to use "target" rather than "xfail" to avoid > the noise > (and invert the conditions, obviously). > Andrew > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai > > > > *From:* Andrew Stubbs > > *Date:* 2023-11-07 18:59 > > *To:* juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai ; > > gcc-patches > > *CC:* jeffreyalaw ; rguenther > > > > *Subject:* Re: [PATCH] test: Fix FAIL of pr97428.c for RVV > > On 07/11/2023 10:10, juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai wrote: > > > So, this patch not only fixes RVV FAIL, but also fixes > GCN ? > > Before the patch I have: > > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c (test for excess errors) > > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump vect "Detected > interleaving > > load of size 8" > > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump vect "Detected > interleaving > > store of size 16" > > gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c: pattern found 4 times > > XFAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump-times vect > "vectorizing > > stmts using SLP" 2 > > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump-not vect "gap > of 6 elements" > > With the patch I now get: > > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c (test for excess errors) > > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump vect "Detected > interleaving > > load of size 8" > > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump vect "Detected > interleaving > > store of size 16" > > gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c: pattern found 4 times > > XFAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump-times vect > "vectorizing > > stmts using SLP" 2 > > XPASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump-times vect > "vectorizing > > stmts using SLP" 4 > > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump-not vect "gap > of 6 elements" > > It's different, but not "fixed". > > Andrew > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai > > > > > > *From:* Andrew Stubbs > > > *Date:* 2023-11-07 18:09 > > > *To:* Juzhe-Zhong ; > > > gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > > > > *CC:* jeffreyalaw@gmail.com > ; > > > rguenther@suse.de > > > *Subject:* Re: [PATCH] test: Fix FAIL of pr97428.c > for RVV > > > On 07/11/2023 07:44, Juzhe-Zhong wrote: > > > > This test shows vectorizing stmts using SLP 4 times > > instead of 2 > > > for RVV. > > > > The reason is RVV has 512 bit vector. > > > > Here is comparison between RVV ans ARM SVE: > > > > https://godbolt.org/z/xc5KE5rPs > > > > > > > > But I notice AMDGCN also has 512 bit vector, > seems this patch > > > will cause FAIL in GCN ? > > > > > > > > Not sure whether GCN is 2 times or 4 times ? > > > The pattern matches 4 times on GCN. > > > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > > > > > > > > * gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c: Fix FAIL for RVV. > > > > > > > > --- > > > > gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c | 3 ++- > > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c > > > b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c > > > > index ad6416096aa..352c9bf04a7 100644 > > > > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c > > > > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c > > > > @@ -43,5 +43,6 @@ void foo_i2(dcmlx4_t dst[], > const dcmlx_t > > > src[], int n) > > > > /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump "Detected > interleaving > > store of > > > size 16" "vect" } } */ > > > > /* We're not able to peel & apply re-aligning > to make > > accesses > > > well-aligned for !vect_hw_misalign, > > > > but we could by peeling the stores for > alignment and > > > applying re-aligning loads. */ > > > > -/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times > "vectorizing stmts using > > > SLP" 2 "vect" { xfail { ! vect_hw_misalign } } } } */ > > > > +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times > "vectorizing stmts using > > > SLP" 2 "vect" { xfail { { ! vect_hw_misalign } || > { vect512 } > > } } } } */ > > > > +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times > "vectorizing stmts using > > > SLP" 4 "vect" { xfail { { ! vect_hw_misalign } || > { ! vect512 > > } } } > > > } } */ > > > > /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-not "gap of 6 > elements" > > "vect" } > > > } */ > > > > > >