From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ot1-x341.google.com (mail-ot1-x341.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::341]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AAE63385800C for ; Sat, 7 Nov 2020 07:50:05 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org AAE63385800C Received: by mail-ot1-x341.google.com with SMTP id z16so3549256otq.6 for ; Fri, 06 Nov 2020 23:50:05 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=mG5KU0l/ELF5yLw92inkhrlJT0uitO6KJxH3+ZAJfEs=; b=W6Ri64/ZQQuaGpoMVAJIUp1ItZm6X8no+I1jc6+5ZT1UYsWn9a6PQ8BlPWv1GZO++5 5B97ZFha1K/MEgbbAeu72PQt3JxD7b/6Vib8BDnq91LegiMWOVwLzkL+JSIAcdx23cG+ N0l2LT91GvPtHpO2Y18qNYXwHsq3SGjsh087aNchHZykCvawv9UV+2zw0a/nJk2cMx3X 4t2QfwIJmMPT0EPBMLJ+gJYPl61cTDgUV7t6IfPb+YdYroIOwFevMVHnd6U6Nb2DkdV/ FmpXe+lChAcuUO/zNgas3manjlB/2DP/+leoEH+JMC5mo/sE9kADVU+MlMspDRwIbM+S /Qtg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533xLc6UgfhWM6S947dpVUG2Tin4LCbIo0oT6Lfgrj8q6M2OI1te LdorZ5zJ6YjKR6Nd4gNK3w6wynL1p2EU3vt1dfqgMQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzV6In0fbQIfBRcyxWYJQ2ROH7nvxuSO/pcAXJV0+yQqa7wPfk8XcHVw9nkJ8FCzBxVHTAt78pXQpZDelI8fbI= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:2667:: with SMTP id a94mr3259443otb.73.1604735404994; Fri, 06 Nov 2020 23:50:04 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Christophe Lyon Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2020 08:49:54 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] arm: [testcase] Better narrow some bfloat16 testcase To: Andrea Corallo Cc: Kyrylo Tkachov , "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" , Richard Earnshaw , nd Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, GIT_PATCH_0, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Nov 2020 07:50:07 -0000 On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 at 15:06, Andrea Corallo wrote: > > Christophe Lyon writes: > > > On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 at 15:30, Andrea Corallo wrote: > >> > >> Christophe Lyon writes: > >> > >> > On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 at 12:11, Andrea Corallo wrote: > >> >> > >> >> Christophe Lyon writes: > >> >> > >> >> [...] > >> >> > >> >> >> I think you need to add -mfloat-abi=hard to the dg-additional-options > >> >> >> otherwise vld1_lane_bf16_1.c > >> >> >> fails on targets with a soft float-abi default (eg arm-linux-gnueabi). > >> >> >> > >> >> >> See bf16_vldn_1.c. > >> >> > > >> >> > Actually that's not sufficient because in turn we get: > >> >> > /sysroot-arm-none-linux-gnueabi/usr/include/gnu/stubs.h:10:11: fatal > >> >> > error: gnu/stubs-hard.h: No such file or directory > >> >> > > >> >> > So you should check that -mfloat-abi=hard is supported. > >> >> > > >> >> > Ditto for the vst tests. > >> >> > >> >> Hi Christophe, > >> >> > >> >> this patch should implement your suggestions. > >> >> > >> >> On my arm-none-linux-gnueabi setup the tests were already skipped > >> >> as unsupported so if you could test and confirm this fixes the > >> >> issue you see would be great. > >> > > >> > Do you know why they are unsupported in your setup? > >> > >> We probably have a different GCC configuration. Could you share how > >> it's configured your? > >> > > Sure, for instance: > > --target=arm-none-linux-gnueabi --with-float=soft --with-mode=arm > > --with-cpu=cortex-a9 > > Thanks, I see now what was going on, my gas has no bf16 support so the > test was marked as unsupported. Dunno why I assumed > check_no_compiler_messages_nocache wasn't testing the whole compilation > process. > > >> >> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp b/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp > >> >> index 15f0649f8ae..2ab7e39756d 100644 > >> >> --- a/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp > >> >> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp > >> >> @@ -5213,6 +5213,10 @@ proc check_effective_target_arm_v8_2a_bf16_neon_ok_nocache { } { > >> >> return 0; > >> >> } > >> >> > >> >> + if { ! [check_effective_target_arm_hard_ok] } { > >> >> + return 0; > >> >> + } > >> >> + > >> >> foreach flags {"" "-mfloat-abi=hard -mfpu=neon-fp-armv8" "-mfloat-abi=softfp -mfpu=neon-fp-armv8" } { > >> >> if { [check_no_compiler_messages_nocache arm_v8_2a_bf16_neon_ok object { > >> >> #include > >> > > >> > This seems strange since you would now exit early if > >> > check_effective_target_arm_hard_ok is false, so you'll never need the > >> > -mfloat-abi=softfp version of the flags. > >> > >> So IIUC your suggestion would be to test with higher priority softfp and > >> in case we decide to go for hardfp make sure > >> check_effective_target_arm_hard_ok is satisfied. Am I correct? > >> > > ISTM that other tests that need hardfp check if it's supported in the > > test, not in other effective targets. > > > > For instance mve/intrinsics/mve_fpu1.c > > > > I can see that quite a few tests that use -mfloat-abi=hard do not > > check whether it's supported. Those I checked do not include > > arm_neon.h and thus do not end up with the gnu/stubs-hard.h error > > above. > > I see thanks for the explaination. The attached should do the job. > Yes, it works for me, thanks. > Andrea >