Re: [AArch64][ARM][GCC][PATCHv2 3/3] Add tests for missing Poly64_t intrinsics to GCC

[Christophe Lyon <christophe.lyon@linaro.org>]

Hi Tamar,


On 29 November 2016 at 10:50, Tamar Christina <Tamar.Christina@arm.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> The new patch contains the proper types for the intrinsics that should be returning uint64x1
> and has the rest of the comments by Christophe in them.
>

LGTM.

One more question: maybe we want to add explicit tests for vdup*_v_p64
even though they are aliases for vmov?

Christophe

> Kind Regards,
> Tamar
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Tamar Christina
> Sent: Friday, November 25, 2016 4:01:30 PM
> To: Christophe Lyon
> Cc: GCC Patches; christophe.lyon@st.com; Marcus Shawcroft; Richard Earnshaw; James Greenhalgh; Kyrylo Tkachov; nd
> Subject: RE: [AArch64][ARM][GCC][PATCHv2 3/3] Add tests for missing Poly64_t intrinsics to GCC
>
>  >
>> > A few comments about this new version:
>> > * arm-neon-ref.h: why do you create
>> CHECK_RESULTS_NAMED_NO_FP16_NO_POLY64?
>> > Can't you just add calls to CHECK_CRYPTO in the existing
>> > CHECK_RESULTS_NAMED_NO_FP16?
>
> Yes, that should be fine, I didn't used to have CHECK_CRYPTO before and when I added it
> I didn't remove the split. I'll do it now.
>
>> >
>> > * p64_p128:
>> > From what I can see ARM and AArch64 differ on the vceq variants
>> > available with poly64.
>> > For ARM, arm_neon.h contains: uint64x1_t vceq_p64 (poly64x1_t __a,
>> > poly64x1_t __b) For AArch64, I can't see vceq_p64 in arm_neon.h? ...
>> > Actually I've just noticed the other you submitted while I was writing
>> > this, where you add vceq_p64 for aarch64, but it still returns
>> > uint64_t.
>> > Why do you change the vceq_64 test to return poly64_t instead of
>> uint64_t?
>
> This patch is slightly outdated. The correct type is `uint64_t` but when it was noticed
> This patch was already sent. New one coming soon.
>
>> >
>> > Why do you add #ifdef __aarch64 before vldX_p64 tests and until vsli_p64?
>> >
>
> This is wrong, remove them. It was supposed to be around the vldX_lane_p64 tests.
>
>> > The comment /* vget_lane_p64 tests.  */ is wrong before VLDX_LANE
>> > tests
>> >
>> > You need to protect the new vmov, vget_high and vget_lane tests with
>> > #ifdef __aarch64__.
>> >
>
> vget_lane is already in an #ifdef, vmov you're right, but I also notice that the
> test calls VDUP instead of VMOV, which explains why I didn't get a test failure.
>
> Thanks for the feedback,
> I'll get these updated.
>
>>
>> Actually, vget_high_p64 exists on arm, so no need for the #fidef for it.
>>
>>
>> > Christophe
>> >
>> >> Kind regards,
>> >> Tamar
>> >> ________________________________________
>> >> From: Tamar Christina
>> >> Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2016 11:58:46 AM
>> >> To: Christophe Lyon
>> >> Cc: GCC Patches; christophe.lyon@st.com; Marcus Shawcroft; Richard
>> >> Earnshaw; James Greenhalgh; Kyrylo Tkachov; nd
>> >> Subject: RE: [AArch64][ARM][GCC][PATCHv2 3/3] Add tests for missing
>> >> Poly64_t intrinsics to GCC
>> >>
>> >> Hi Christophe,
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for the review!
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> A while ago I added p64_p128.c, to contain all the poly64/128 tests
>> >>> except for vreinterpret.
>> >>> Why do you need to create p64.c ?
>> >>
>> >> I originally created it because I had a much smaller set of
>> >> intrinsics that I wanted to add initially, this grew and It hadn't occurred to
>> me that I can use the existing file now.
>> >>
>> >> Another reason was the effective-target arm_crypto_ok as you
>> mentioned below.
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> Similarly, adding tests for vcreate_p64 etc... in p64.c or
>> >>> p64_p128.c might be easier to maintain than adding them to vcreate.c
>> >>> etc with several #ifdef conditions.
>> >>
>> >> Fair enough, I'll move them to p64_p128.c.
>> >>
>> >>> For vdup-vmod.c, why do you add the "&& defined(__aarch64__)"
>> >>> condition? These intrinsics are defined in arm/arm_neon.h, right?
>> >>> They are tested in p64_p128.c
>> >>
>> >> I should have looked for them, they weren't being tested before so I
>> >> had Mistakenly assumed that they weren't available. Now I realize I
>> >> just need To add the proper test option to the file to enable crypto. I'll
>> update this as well.
>> >>
>> >>> Looking at your patch, it seems some tests are currently missing for arm:
>> >>> vget_high_p64. I'm not sure why I missed it when I removed neont-
>> >>> testgen...
>> >>
>> >> I'll adjust the test conditions so they run for ARM as well.
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> Regarding vreinterpret_p128.c, doesn't the existing effective-target
>> >>> arm_crypto_ok prevent the tests from running on aarch64?
>> >>
>> >> Yes they do, I was comparing the output against a clean version and
>> >> hasn't noticed That they weren't running. Thanks!
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks,
>> >>>
>> >>> Christophe