From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9486 invoked by alias); 19 Oct 2004 12:23:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 9453 invoked from network); 19 Oct 2004 12:23:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mtagate2.de.ibm.com) (195.212.29.151) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 19 Oct 2004 12:23:23 -0000 Received: from d12nrmr1507.megacenter.de.ibm.com (d12nrmr1507.megacenter.de.ibm.com [9.149.167.1]) by mtagate2.de.ibm.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9JCNNxD077908; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 12:23:23 GMT Received: from d12ml102.megacenter.de.ibm.com (d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com [9.149.165.228]) by d12nrmr1507.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.12.10/NCO/VER6.6) with ESMTP id i9JCNM1S215054; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 14:23:22 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20041018235444.GA5842@us.ibm.com> Subject: Re: patch: cleanup gcc.dg/vect/ To: Janis Johnson Cc: Aldy Hernandez , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Message-ID: From: Dorit Naishlos Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 12:40:00 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2004-10/txt/msg01597.txt.bz2 > > I am not sure if we may still want to run the tests, especially the compile > > tests even if the HW is not available. Dorit? I prefer Janis's suggestion: > Compiling and the checks in the dg-final step are useful, so perhaps we > can change the "dg-do" option from "run" to "compile" if the hardware > doesn't have vector support, as is done for the gcc.dg/vmx tests. As for the -mpowerpc64 issue: > I'm making progress but have questions for Dorit and others who have > contributed the vect tests: > > Tests vect-72.c and vect-73.c use -mpowerpc64. That has no effect on a > biarch compiler; should it have been -m64? no. (by the way, it's actually tests vect-82_64.c and vect-83_64.c, right?). -mpowerpc64 makes a difference when handling the following loop: for (i=0 to 4) a_DImode[i] = 0. Before, the vectorizer vectorized this loop, using TImode: for (i=0 to 2) vect_pa_TImode[i] = 0. If -mpowerpc64 was used, this was recognized as movti_ppc64, and later expanded into two movdi_internal64. If -mpowerpc64 was not used, we ICEd in recog. Now, the vectorizer does not try to vectorize this loop anymore because TImode is not a VECTOR_MODE_P. Janis, Aldi - thanks for cleaning up the vect tests! dorit. Janis Johnson com> cc: Aldy Hernandez , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Dorit Naishlos/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL 19/10/2004 01:54 Subject: Re: patch: cleanup gcc.dg/vect/ On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 03:06:09PM -0700, Janis Johnson wrote: > On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 03:41:19PM -0400, Aldy Hernandez wrote: > > I have also disabled the powerpc tests when VMX is not available. Right > > now, we indiscriminately try to run tests when hardware may not be > > available. > > > > I am not sure if we may still want to run the tests, especially the compile > > tests even if the HW is not available. Dorit? Folks? If this is the > > case, then we can just disable the tests for powerpc-*-*spe. > > Compiling and the checks in the dg-final step are useful, so perhaps we > can change the "dg-do" option from "run" to "compile" if the hardware > doesn't have vector support, as is done for the gcc.dg/vmx tests. I'll > take a look and let you know if it will fit in nicely with the vect test > infrastructure. I'm making progress but have questions for Dorit and others who have contributed the vect tests: Tests vect-72.c and vect-73.c use -mpowerpc64. That has no effect on a biarch compiler; should it have been -m64? I always test a biarch compiler with both -m32 and -m64 anyway so using -m64 in a test would cause problems, or at least confusion. There are tests in other parts of the testsuite that are only relevant for either -m32 or -m64 that we're trying to figure out how to handle. There are currently 91 tests in gcc.dg/vect and only 31 of them specify mipsisa64*-*-* as a target. Is it an oversight that most of the other tests are not run for mipsisa64? Janis