From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 89593 invoked by alias); 20 May 2016 11:41:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 89299 invoked by uid 89); 20 May 2016 11:41:07 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=H*MI:sk:2016052 X-HELO: mx2.suse.de Received: from mx2.suse.de (HELO mx2.suse.de) (195.135.220.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (CAMELLIA256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 20 May 2016 11:41:05 +0000 Received: from relay1.suse.de (charybdis-ext.suse.de [195.135.220.254]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id F16ADAC6A; Fri, 20 May 2016 11:41:01 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 11:41:00 -0000 From: Richard Biener To: Jakub Jelinek cc: Eric Botcazou , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Michael Matz Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] Introduce BIT_FIELD_INSERT In-Reply-To: <20160520112525.GH28550@tucnak.redhat.com> Message-ID: References: <10155617.0hHYLBiUYX@polaris> <20160520112525.GH28550@tucnak.redhat.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (LSU 23 2013-08-11) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2016-05/txt/msg01633.txt.bz2 On Fri, 20 May 2016, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 10:59:18AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > > Sounds good. I will commit later with your wording. > > Unfortunately, the new testcase fails e.g. on i?86-*-* or on powerpc*. > On i?86-*-* (without -msse) I actually see 2 different issues, one is > extra -Wpsabi warnings, and another is the dump scan, the optimization isn't > used there at all if we don't have SSE HW. > Surprisingly, on powerpc* the only problem is the extra warnings about ABI > compatibility, but the scan matches, even if there is no vector support. > Similarly on s390* too (and there are no warnings even). I suppose they still have vector modes enabled. > So, dunno if we should limit the scan-tree-dump-times only to a few selected > arches (e.g. those where we add dg-additional-options for, plus some where > it is known to work without additional options, like perhaps aarch64*-*-*, > maybe spu*-*-*, what else?). I'd say ppc and aarch64 are fine. Thanks for noticing. Richard. > 2016-05-20 Jakub Jelinek > > PR tree-optimization/29756 > gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vector-6.c: Add -Wno-psabi -w to dg-options. > Add -msse2 for x86 and -maltivec for powerpc. > > --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vector-6.c.jj 2016-05-20 12:44:33.000000000 +0200 > +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vector-6.c 2016-05-20 13:17:08.730168547 +0200 > @@ -1,5 +1,7 @@ > /* { dg-do compile } */ > -/* { dg-options "-O -fdump-tree-ccp1" } */ > +/* { dg-options "-O -fdump-tree-ccp1 -Wno-psabi -w" } */ > +/* { dg-additional-options "-msse2" { target i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } } */ > +/* { dg-additional-options "-maltivec" { target powerpc_altivec_ok } } */ > > typedef int v4si __attribute__((vector_size (4 * sizeof (int)))); > > > > Jakub