On 16 January 2015 at 17:30, Christophe Lyon <christophe.lyon@linaro.org> wrote:
> On 16 January 2015 at 17:07, Tejas Belagod <tejas.belagod@arm.com> wrote:
>> On 13/01/15 15:18, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>          * gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/vXXXhn.inc: New file.
>>>          * gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/vraddhn.c: New file.
>>>          * gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/vrsubhn.c: New file.
>>>          * gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/vsubhn.c: New file.
>>>          * gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/vaddhn.c: Use code from
>>>          vXXXhn.inc.
>>>
>>> diff --git
>>> a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/vXXXhn.inc
>>> b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/vXXXhn.inc
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 0000000..0dbcc92
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/vXXXhn.inc
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,50 @@
>>> +#define FNNAME1(NAME) exec_ ## NAME
>>> +#define FNNAME(NAME) FNNAME1(NAME)
>>> +
>>> +void FNNAME (INSN_NAME) (void)
>>> +{
>>> +  /* Basic test: vec64=vaddhn(vec128_a, vec128_b), then store the result.
>>> */
>>> +#define TEST_VADDHN1(INSN, T1, T2, W, W2, N)                           \
>>> +  VECT_VAR(vector64, T1, W2, N) = INSN##_##T2##W(VECT_VAR(vector1, T1, W,
>>> N), \
>>> +                                                VECT_VAR(vector2, T1, W,
>>> N)); \
>>> +  vst1_##T2##W2(VECT_VAR(result, T1, W2, N), VECT_VAR(vector64, T1, W2,
>>> N))
>>> +
>>> +#define TEST_VADDHN(INSN, T1, T2, W, W2, N)    \
>>> +  TEST_VADDHN1(INSN, T1, T2, W, W2, N)
>>> +
>>
>>
>> Minor nit. If this is a template file, maybe you should name this macro
>> TEST_ADDHN as TEST_XXHN? Just that a template having an INSN name is
>> confusing.
> Agreed.
>
>>> +VECT_VAR_DECL(expected,poly,8,8) [] = { 0x33, 0x33, 0x33, 0x33,
>>> +                                       0x33, 0x33, 0x33, 0x33 };
>>> +VECT_VAR_DECL(expected,poly,16,4) [] = { 0x3333, 0x3333, 0x3333, 0x3333
>>> };
>>
>>
>> Though never used, poly seems to have sneaked in here too.
> Indeed, sorry for that.
> I rushed to have as many tests as possible ready before stage 4, but
> obviously I missed a few cleanups.
>

Here is an updated version, where I have removed a few more useless
variables than you noticed: the [u]int64x1 as well as the 128 bits
ones.

Christophe.

>> Otherwise, LGTM.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Tejas.
>>