public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH] RISC-V: Make xtheadcondmov-indirect tests robust against instruction reordering
@ 2023-10-09 22:47 Christoph Muellner
  2023-10-10  3:08 ` Kito Cheng
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Muellner @ 2023-10-09 22:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-patches, Kito Cheng, Jim Wilson, Palmer Dabbelt,
	Andrew Waterman, Philipp Tomsich, Jeff Law, Patrick O'Neill,
	Vineet Gupta
  Cc: Christoph Müllner

From: Christoph Müllner <christoph.muellner@vrull.eu>

Fixes: c1bc7513b1d7 ("RISC-V: const: hide mvconst splitter from IRA")

A recent change broke the xtheadcondmov-indirect tests, because the order of
emitted instructions changed. Since the test is too strict when testing for
a fixed instruction order, let's change the tests to simply count instruction,
like it is done for similar tests.

Reported-by: Patrick O'Neill <patrick@rivosinc.com>
Signed-off-by: Christoph Müllner <christoph.muellner@vrull.eu>

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

	* gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-indirect.c: Make robust against
	instruction reordering.

Signed-off-by: Christoph Müllner <christoph.muellner@vrull.eu>
---
 .../gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-indirect.c         | 11 ++++++++---
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-indirect.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-indirect.c
index c3253ba5239..eba1b86137b 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-indirect.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-indirect.c
@@ -1,8 +1,7 @@
 /* { dg-do compile } */
-/* { dg-options "-march=rv32gc_xtheadcondmov -fno-sched-pressure" { target { rv32 } } } */
-/* { dg-options "-march=rv64gc_xtheadcondmov -fno-sched-pressure" { target { rv64 } } } */
+/* { dg-options "-march=rv32gc_xtheadcondmov" { target { rv32 } } } */
+/* { dg-options "-march=rv64gc_xtheadcondmov" { target { rv64 } } } */
 /* { dg-skip-if "" { *-*-* } {"-O0" "-Os" "-Og" "-Oz" "-flto" } } */
-/* { dg-final { check-function-bodies "**" "" } } */
 
 /*
 ** ConEmv_imm_imm_reg:
@@ -116,3 +115,9 @@ int ConNmv_reg_reg_reg(int x, int y, int z, int n)
     return z;
   return n;
 }
+
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "addi\t" 5 } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "li\t" 4 } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sub\t" 4 } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "th.mveqz\t" 4 } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "th.mvnez\t" 4 } } */
-- 
2.41.0


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Make xtheadcondmov-indirect tests robust against instruction reordering
  2023-10-09 22:47 [PATCH] RISC-V: Make xtheadcondmov-indirect tests robust against instruction reordering Christoph Muellner
@ 2023-10-10  3:08 ` Kito Cheng
  2023-10-10 12:17   ` Christoph Müllner
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Kito Cheng @ 2023-10-10  3:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Christoph Muellner
  Cc: gcc-patches, Jim Wilson, Palmer Dabbelt, Andrew Waterman,
	Philipp Tomsich, Jeff Law, Patrick O'Neill, Vineet Gupta

I guess you may also want to clean up those bodies for "check-function-bodies"?

On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 3:47 PM Christoph Muellner
<christoph.muellner@vrull.eu> wrote:
>
> From: Christoph Müllner <christoph.muellner@vrull.eu>
>
> Fixes: c1bc7513b1d7 ("RISC-V: const: hide mvconst splitter from IRA")
>
> A recent change broke the xtheadcondmov-indirect tests, because the order of
> emitted instructions changed. Since the test is too strict when testing for
> a fixed instruction order, let's change the tests to simply count instruction,
> like it is done for similar tests.
>
> Reported-by: Patrick O'Neill <patrick@rivosinc.com>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Müllner <christoph.muellner@vrull.eu>
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>
>         * gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-indirect.c: Make robust against
>         instruction reordering.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Müllner <christoph.muellner@vrull.eu>
> ---
>  .../gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-indirect.c         | 11 ++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-indirect.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-indirect.c
> index c3253ba5239..eba1b86137b 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-indirect.c
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-indirect.c
> @@ -1,8 +1,7 @@
>  /* { dg-do compile } */
> -/* { dg-options "-march=rv32gc_xtheadcondmov -fno-sched-pressure" { target { rv32 } } } */
> -/* { dg-options "-march=rv64gc_xtheadcondmov -fno-sched-pressure" { target { rv64 } } } */
> +/* { dg-options "-march=rv32gc_xtheadcondmov" { target { rv32 } } } */
> +/* { dg-options "-march=rv64gc_xtheadcondmov" { target { rv64 } } } */
>  /* { dg-skip-if "" { *-*-* } {"-O0" "-Os" "-Og" "-Oz" "-flto" } } */
> -/* { dg-final { check-function-bodies "**" "" } } */
>
>  /*
>  ** ConEmv_imm_imm_reg:
> @@ -116,3 +115,9 @@ int ConNmv_reg_reg_reg(int x, int y, int z, int n)
>      return z;
>    return n;
>  }
> +
> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "addi\t" 5 } } */
> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "li\t" 4 } } */
> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sub\t" 4 } } */
> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "th.mveqz\t" 4 } } */
> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "th.mvnez\t" 4 } } */
> --
> 2.41.0
>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Make xtheadcondmov-indirect tests robust against instruction reordering
  2023-10-10  3:08 ` Kito Cheng
@ 2023-10-10 12:17   ` Christoph Müllner
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Müllner @ 2023-10-10 12:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Kito Cheng
  Cc: gcc-patches, Jim Wilson, Palmer Dabbelt, Andrew Waterman,
	Philipp Tomsich, Jeff Law, Patrick O'Neill, Vineet Gupta

On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 5:08 AM Kito Cheng <kito.cheng@sifive.com> wrote:
>
> I guess you may also want to clean up those bodies for "check-function-bodies"?

I kept the comments on purpose, so that I have a basis for the
expected instruction counts.
But of course, there is no need to follow the format.
Would the following format change of the comments be ok?

-/*
-** ConEmv_imm_imm_reg:
-**     addi    a[0-9]+,a[0-9]+,-1000
-**     li      a[0-9]+,10
-**     th\.mvnez       a[0-9]+,a[0-9]+,a[0-9]+
-**     ret
-*/
+/* addi aX, aX, -1000
+   li aX, 10
+   th.mvnez aX, aX, aX  */

BR
Christoph

>
> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 3:47 PM Christoph Muellner
> <christoph.muellner@vrull.eu> wrote:
> >
> > From: Christoph Müllner <christoph.muellner@vrull.eu>
> >
> > Fixes: c1bc7513b1d7 ("RISC-V: const: hide mvconst splitter from IRA")
> >
> > A recent change broke the xtheadcondmov-indirect tests, because the order of
> > emitted instructions changed. Since the test is too strict when testing for
> > a fixed instruction order, let's change the tests to simply count instruction,
> > like it is done for similar tests.
> >
> > Reported-by: Patrick O'Neill <patrick@rivosinc.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Christoph Müllner <christoph.muellner@vrull.eu>
> >
> > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
> >
> >         * gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-indirect.c: Make robust against
> >         instruction reordering.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Christoph Müllner <christoph.muellner@vrull.eu>
> > ---
> >  .../gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-indirect.c         | 11 ++++++++---
> >  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-indirect.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-indirect.c
> > index c3253ba5239..eba1b86137b 100644
> > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-indirect.c
> > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/xtheadcondmov-indirect.c
> > @@ -1,8 +1,7 @@
> >  /* { dg-do compile } */
> > -/* { dg-options "-march=rv32gc_xtheadcondmov -fno-sched-pressure" { target { rv32 } } } */
> > -/* { dg-options "-march=rv64gc_xtheadcondmov -fno-sched-pressure" { target { rv64 } } } */
> > +/* { dg-options "-march=rv32gc_xtheadcondmov" { target { rv32 } } } */
> > +/* { dg-options "-march=rv64gc_xtheadcondmov" { target { rv64 } } } */
> >  /* { dg-skip-if "" { *-*-* } {"-O0" "-Os" "-Og" "-Oz" "-flto" } } */
> > -/* { dg-final { check-function-bodies "**" "" } } */
> >
> >  /*
> >  ** ConEmv_imm_imm_reg:
> > @@ -116,3 +115,9 @@ int ConNmv_reg_reg_reg(int x, int y, int z, int n)
> >      return z;
> >    return n;
> >  }
> > +
> > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "addi\t" 5 } } */
> > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "li\t" 4 } } */
> > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sub\t" 4 } } */
> > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "th.mveqz\t" 4 } } */
> > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "th.mvnez\t" 4 } } */
> > --
> > 2.41.0
> >

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2023-10-10 12:17 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2023-10-09 22:47 [PATCH] RISC-V: Make xtheadcondmov-indirect tests robust against instruction reordering Christoph Muellner
2023-10-10  3:08 ` Kito Cheng
2023-10-10 12:17   ` Christoph Müllner

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).