public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
To: "Andre Vieira (lists)" <andre.simoesdiasvieira@arm.com>
Cc: Rainer Orth <ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>,
	 "Andre Vieira (lists) via Gcc-patches" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
	 Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>
Subject: Re: ifcvt: Fix bitpos calculation in bitfield lowering [PR107229]
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2022 14:15:32 +0000 (UTC)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <nycvar.YFH.7.77.849.2210131415020.18337@jbgna.fhfr.qr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <579078c6-d444-03f2-4db7-1c916b1e88e8@arm.com>

On Thu, 13 Oct 2022, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:

> Hi Rainer,
> 
> Thanks for reporting, I was actually expecting these! I thought about
> pre-empting them by using a positive filter on the tests for aarch64 and
> x86_64 as I knew those would pass, but I thought it would be better to let
> other targets report failures since then you get a testsuite that covers more
> targets than just what I'm able to check.
> 
> Are there any sparc architectures that would support these or should I just
> xfail sparc*-*-* ?
> 
> For instance: I also saw PR107240 for which one of the write tests fails on
> Power 7 BE. I'm suggesting adding an xfail for that one

for the failure below we seem to require vectorizing shifts for which I
think we have a vect_* target to check?

> Kind regards,
> Andre
> 
> On 13/10/2022 12:39, Rainer Orth wrote:
> > Hi Andre,
> >
> >> The bitposition calculation for the bitfield lowering in loop if conversion
> >> was not
> >> taking DECL_FIELD_OFFSET into account, which meant that it would result in
> >> wrong bitpositions for bitfields that did not end up having representations
> >> starting at the beginning of the struct.
> >>
> >> Bootstrappend and regression tested on aarch64-none-linux-gnu and
> >> x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
> > I tried this patch together with the one for PR tree-optimization/107226
> > on sparc-sun-solaris2.11 to check if it cures the bootstrap failure
> > reported in PR tree-optimization/107232.  While this restores bootstrap,
> > several of the new tests FAIL:
> >
> > +FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-bitfield-read-1.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects
> > scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1 loops" 1
> > +FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-bitfield-read-1.c scan-tree-dump-times vect
> > "vectorized 1 loops" 1
> > +FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-bitfield-read-2.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects
> > scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1 loops" 1
> > +FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-bitfield-read-2.c scan-tree-dump-times vect
> > "vectorized 1 loops" 1
> > +FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-bitfield-read-3.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects
> > scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 2 loops" 1
> > +FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-bitfield-read-3.c scan-tree-dump-times vect
> > "vectorized 2 loops" 1
> > +FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-bitfield-read-4.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects
> > scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1 loops" 1
> > +FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-bitfield-read-4.c scan-tree-dump-times vect
> > "vectorized 1 loops" 1
> > +FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-bitfield-read-6.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects
> > scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1 loops" 1
> > +FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-bitfield-write-1.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects
> > scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1 loops" 1
> > +FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-bitfield-write-1.c scan-tree-dump-times vect
> > "vectorized 1 loops" 1
> > +FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-bitfield-write-2.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects
> > scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1 loops" 1
> > +FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-bitfield-write-2.c scan-tree-dump-times vect
> > "vectorized 1 loops" 1
> > +FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-bitfield-write-3.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects
> > scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1 loops" 1
> > +FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-bitfield-write-3.c scan-tree-dump-times vect
> > "vectorized 1 loops" 1
> > +FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-bitfield-write-5.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects
> > scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1 loops" 1
> > +FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-bitfield-write-5.c scan-tree-dump-times vect
> > "vectorized 1 loops" 1
> >
> > For vect-bitfield-read-1.c, the dump has
> >
> > gcc.dg/vect/vect-bitfield-read-1.c:25:23: note:   ==> examining pattern def
> > statement: patt_31 = patt_30 >> 1;
> > gcc.dg/vect/vect-bitfield-read-1.c:25:23: note:   ==> examining statement:
> > patt_31 = patt_30 >> 1;
> > gcc.dg/vect/vect-bitfield-read-1.c:25:23: note:   vect_is_simple_use:
> > operand _ifc__27 & 4294967294, type of def: internal
> > gcc.dg/vect/vect-bitfield-read-1.c:25:23: note:   vect_is_simple_use:
> > vectype vector(2) unsigned int
> > gcc.dg/vect/vect-bitfield-read-1.c:25:23: note:   vect_is_simple_use:
> > operand 1, type of def: constant
> > gcc.dg/vect/vect-bitfield-read-1.c:25:23: missed:   op not supported by
> > target.
> > gcc.dg/vect/vect-bitfield-read-1.c:23:1: missed:   not vectorized: relevant
> > stmt not supported: patt_31 = patt_30 >> 1;
> > gcc.dg/vect/vect-bitfield-read-1.c:25:23: missed:  bad operation or
> > unsupported loop bound.
> > gcc.dg/vect/vect-bitfield-read-1.c:25:23: note:  ***** Analysis  failed with
> > vector mode V2SI
> >
> >  Rainer
> >
> 

-- 
Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Frankenstrasse 146, 90461 Nuernberg,
Germany; GF: Ivo Totev, Andrew Myers, Andrew McDonald, Boudien Moerman;
HRB 36809 (AG Nuernberg)

  reply	other threads:[~2022-10-13 14:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-10-12 17:29 Andre Vieira (lists)
2022-10-13  8:14 ` Richard Biener
2022-10-13 10:15   ` Andre Vieira (lists)
2022-10-13 10:18     ` Richard Biener
2022-10-13 11:39 ` Rainer Orth
2022-10-13 13:55   ` Andre Vieira (lists)
2022-10-13 14:15     ` Richard Biener [this message]
2022-10-13 14:42       ` Andre Vieira (lists)

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=nycvar.YFH.7.77.849.2210131415020.18337@jbgna.fhfr.qr \
    --to=rguenther@suse.de \
    --cc=andre.simoesdiasvieira@arm.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=richard.sandiford@arm.com \
    --cc=ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).