From: "Bin.Cheng" <amker.cheng@gmail.com>
To: Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>
Cc: "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH TEST]Rectify test case gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ivopt_mult_4.c
Date: Wed, 31 May 2017 12:45:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHFci2-tH+zMGzG7WCyiHUGkMrOgenjcfj06CAFqZ0VMf+m+=w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFiYyc0LjHDt+W1nH4E6AVjnyQHmxgUFWcKpJLpM6Te0PZWDeQ@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1216 bytes --]
On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Richard Biener
<richard.guenther@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 8:00 PM, Bin Cheng <Bin.Cheng@arm.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I believe this tests has been wrongly modified previously. It is to test that the exit check on
>> pointer shouldn't be replaced by integer IV. Somehow GCC starts replacing the check on
>> integer IV with pointer IV. It's valid, though inefficient. And somehow we starting checking
>> this iv replacement. This patch rectifies it by specifically checking the check on pointer
>> shouldn't be replaced.
>
> So maybe it should then test that the pointer test prevails? Or
> rather that it doesn't replace
> any exit test? If 'p' changes for '_2' for unrelated reasons the
> pattern will be not testing what
> it is supposed to test...
Thanks for reviewing, I updated patch testing if condition on p_limit2
still exists before expanding. Is it OK?
Thanks,
bin
>
> Richard.
>
>> Bootstrap and test in series on x86_64. Is it OK?
>> Thanks,
>> bin
>> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
>> 2017-05-11 Bin Cheng <bin.cheng@arm.com>
>>
>> * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ivopt_mult_4.c: Explicitly check comparison
>> on pointer should not be replaced.
[-- Attachment #2: rectify-ivopt_mult_4.txt --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 804 bytes --]
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ivopt_mult_4.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ivopt_mult_4.c
index effb052..e69e416 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ivopt_mult_4.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ivopt_mult_4.c
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
/* { dg-do compile { target {{ i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } && lp64 } } } */
-/* { dg-options "-O2 -m64 -fdump-tree-ivopts-details" } */
+/* { dg-options "-O2 -m64 -fdump-tree-optimized" } */
/* iv i's step 16 so its period is smaller than the max iterations
* i.e. replacing if (p2 > p_limit2) with testing of i may result in
@@ -21,4 +21,4 @@ long foo(long* p, long* p2, int N1, int N2)
return s;
}
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump "Replacing exit test" "ivopts"} } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump "if \\(.*p_limit2.*\\)" "optimized"} } */
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-05-31 12:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-05-25 18:15 Bin Cheng
2017-05-26 11:50 ` Richard Biener
2017-05-31 12:45 ` Bin.Cheng [this message]
2017-05-31 13:34 ` Richard Biener
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAHFci2-tH+zMGzG7WCyiHUGkMrOgenjcfj06CAFqZ0VMf+m+=w@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=amker.cheng@gmail.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=richard.guenther@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).