* [PATCH] ppc: testsuite: test for arch_pwr7 with -mvsx in fold-vec-insert-double @ 2022-04-11 23:59 Alexandre Oliva 2022-04-12 18:04 ` Segher Boessenkool 0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread From: Alexandre Oliva @ 2022-04-11 23:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-patches; +Cc: David Edelsohn, Segher Boessenkool gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-insert-double.c is compiled with -mvsx, while the expected asm output depends on target has_arch_pwr7, which is tested for without -mvsx. In some of our configurations, that have altivec and vsx disabled by default, the former defines up to _ARCH_PWR7, while the latter defines only up to _ARCH_PWR4, i.e., we compile for power7, and test for non-power7. This patch, admittedly ugly, enables us to test for asm output according the actual compile target given the explicitly specified flag. I suppose it may be possible to turn this "magic" into a reusable proc that sets a named variable to the result of a wrapped scan test, but I'm not sure I'm up to the task, with the need to deal with additional scoping, so I'm hoping this can be acceptable as is. Tested with gcc-11 targeting ppc64-vx7r2. Ok to install? for gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog * gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-insert-double.c: Test for asm according to the arch selected by -mvsx. --- .../gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-insert-double.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++---- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-insert-double.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-insert-double.c index afd7f7e9924e8..b95f0b33d6c07 100644 --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-insert-double.c +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-insert-double.c @@ -18,21 +18,51 @@ testd_cst (double d, vector double vd) { return vec_insert (d, vd, 1); } + +/* The expected asm output varies depending on target arch_has_pwr7, but the + -mvsx option used for the test may implicitly enable the macro that target + arch_has_pwr7 tests for, while target arch_has_pwr7 doesn't take the option, + so we may end up compiling for one target variant and testing for another. + The following dejagnu magic sets $macro_is_defined to 1 or 0 depending on + whether ARCH_PWR7_is_defined appears in the assembly output. */ +#ifdef _ARCH_PWR7 +int ARCH_PWR7_is_defined = 1; +/* { dg-final { set asm_pattern_to_search_for "ARCH_PWR7_is_defined" } } */ +#endif + +/* { dg-final { global macro_is_defined } } */ +/* { dg-final { set macro_is_defined -1 } } */ +/* { dg-final { rename pass macro-save-pass } } */ +/* { dg-final { rename fail macro-save-fail } } */ +/* { dg-final { proc pass { args } { global macro_is_defined; set macro_is_defined 1 } } } */ +/* { dg-final { proc fail { args } { global macro_is_defined; set macro_is_defined 0 } } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "$asm_pattern_to_search_for" } } */ +/* { dg-final { rename pass macro-dropme-pass } } */ +/* { dg-final { rename macro-save-pass pass } } */ +/* { dg-final { rename fail macro-dropme-fail } } */ +/* { dg-final { rename macro-save-fail fail } } */ +/* { dg-final { if { $macro_is_defined < 0 } { fail "macro detection" } } } */ +/* { dg-final { if { $macro_is_defined < 0 } { return } } } */ + +/* { dg-final { set has_arch_pwr7 $macro_is_defined } } */ +/* This is the end of the magic. + We can now run tests conditionally on $has_arch_pwr7. */ + /* The number of xxpermdi instructions varies between P7,P8,P9, ensure at least one hit. */ /* { dg-final { scan-assembler {\mxxpermdi\M} } } */ /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mrldic\M|\mrlwinm\M} 1 } } */ -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mstxvd2x\M|\mstxv\M|\mstvx\M} 1 { target { ! has_arch_pwr7 } } } } */ -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mstfdx\M|\mstfd\M} 1 { target { ! has_arch_pwr7 } } } } */ -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mlxvd2x\M|\mlxv\M|\mlvx\M} 1 { target { ! has_arch_pwr7 } } } } */ +/* { dg-final { if { ! $has_arch_pwr7 } { scan-assembler-times {\mstxvd2x\M|\mstxv\M|\mstvx\M} 1 } } } */ +/* { dg-final { if { ! $has_arch_pwr7 } { scan-assembler-times {\mstfdx\M|\mstfd\M} 1 } } } */ +/* { dg-final { if { ! $has_arch_pwr7 } { scan-assembler-times {\mlxvd2x\M|\mlxv\M|\mlvx\M} 1 } } } */ -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mstxvd2x\M|\mstxv\M|\mstvx\M} 0 { target { has_arch_pwr7 && lp64 } } } } */ -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mstfdx\M|\mstfd\M} 0 { target { has_arch_pwr7 && lp64 } } } } */ +/* { dg-final { if { $has_arch_pwr7 } { scan-assembler-times {\mstxvd2x\M|\mstxv\M|\mstvx\M} 0 { target { lp64 } } } } } */ +/* { dg-final { if { $has_arch_pwr7 } { scan-assembler-times {\mstfdx\M|\mstfd\M} 0 { target { lp64 } } } } } */ -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mlxvd2x\M|\mlxv\M|\mlvx\M} 0 { target { has_arch_pwr7 && lp64 } } } } */ -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mlxvd2x\M|\mlxv\M|\mlvx\M} 0 { target { has_arch_pwr7 && ilp32 } } } } */ -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mstxvd2x\M|\mstxv\M|\mstvx\M} 0 { target { has_arch_pwr7 && ilp32 } } } } */ -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mstfdx\M|\mstfd\M} 0 { target { has_arch_pwr7 && ilp32 } } } } */ +/* { dg-final { if { $has_arch_pwr7 } { scan-assembler-times {\mlxvd2x\M|\mlxv\M|\mlvx\M} 0 { target { lp64 } } } } } */ +/* { dg-final { if { $has_arch_pwr7 } { scan-assembler-times {\mlxvd2x\M|\mlxv\M|\mlvx\M} 0 { target { ilp32 } } } } } */ +/* { dg-final { if { $has_arch_pwr7 } { scan-assembler-times {\mstxvd2x\M|\mstxv\M|\mstvx\M} 0 { target { ilp32 } } } } } */ +/* { dg-final { if { $has_arch_pwr7 } { scan-assembler-times {\mstfdx\M|\mstfd\M} 0 { target { ilp32 } } } } } */ -- Alexandre Oliva, happy hacker https://FSFLA.org/blogs/lxo/ Free Software Activist GNU Toolchain Engineer Disinformation flourishes because many people care deeply about injustice but very few check the facts. Ask me about <https://stallmansupport.org> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] ppc: testsuite: test for arch_pwr7 with -mvsx in fold-vec-insert-double 2022-04-11 23:59 [PATCH] ppc: testsuite: test for arch_pwr7 with -mvsx in fold-vec-insert-double Alexandre Oliva @ 2022-04-12 18:04 ` Segher Boessenkool 2022-04-13 0:50 ` Alexandre Oliva 0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread From: Segher Boessenkool @ 2022-04-12 18:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Alexandre Oliva; +Cc: gcc-patches, David Edelsohn On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 08:59:41PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > > gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-insert-double.c is compiled with -mvsx, > while the expected asm output depends on target has_arch_pwr7, which > is tested for without -mvsx. > > In some of our configurations, that have altivec and vsx disabled by > default, the former defines up to _ARCH_PWR7, while the latter defines > only up to _ARCH_PWR4, i.e., we compile for power7, and test for > non-power7. You cannot use -mvsx if you do not have -mcpu=power7 (or higher). If -mvsx is allowed (i.e. when powerpc_vsx_ok is satisfied) you always are compiling for power7 or higher. What goes wrong? Segher ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] ppc: testsuite: test for arch_pwr7 with -mvsx in fold-vec-insert-double 2022-04-12 18:04 ` Segher Boessenkool @ 2022-04-13 0:50 ` Alexandre Oliva 0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread From: Alexandre Oliva @ 2022-04-13 0:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Segher Boessenkool; +Cc: gcc-patches, David Edelsohn On Apr 12, 2022, Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 08:59:41PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote: >> >> gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-insert-double.c is compiled with -mvsx, >> while the expected asm output depends on target has_arch_pwr7, which >> is tested for without -mvsx. >> >> In some of our configurations, that have altivec and vsx disabled by >> default, the former defines up to _ARCH_PWR7, while the latter defines >> only up to _ARCH_PWR4, i.e., we compile for power7, and test for >> non-power7. > You cannot use -mvsx if you do not have -mcpu=power7 (or higher). If > -mvsx is allowed (i.e. when powerpc_vsx_ok is satisfied) you always are > compiling for power7 or higher. > What goes wrong? What goes wrong is that, because target has_arch_pwr7 runs the compiler without -mvsx, it gets only power4, so we test for the asm associated with target { ! has_arch_pwr7 }, which is not what's generated. Now, since -mvsx requires power7, it looks like the scan-assembler tests with target { ! has_arch_pwr7 } could be dropped, since they can (should) never run, and so could the target { has_arch_pwr7 } conditionals, since they can (should) be taken for granted. That makes for a much nicer patch. Tested on x86_64-linux-gnu cross to ppc64-vx7r2. Ok to install? ppc: testsuite: drop pwr7 conds in fold-vec-insert-double-insert-double gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-insert-double.c is compiled with -mvsx, which implies power7, but there are scan-assembler checks that depend on target has_arch_pwr7, negated or not, and that target conditional is tested for running the compiler without -mvsx. In some of our configurations, that have altivec and vsx disabled by default, the former defines up to _ARCH_PWR7, while the latter defines only up to _ARCH_PWR4, i.e., we compile for power7, and test for non-power7. Since -mvsx implies power7, the tests for target has_arch_pwr7 would be redundant if performed with -mvsx, so I'm dropping the checks guarded by ! has_arch_pwr7, and dropping has_arch_pwr7 from the others. for gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog * gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-insert-double.c: Constant-fold has_arch_pwr7, implied by -mvsx. --- .../gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-insert-double.c | 16 ++++++---------- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-insert-double.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-insert-double.c index afd7f7e9924e8..e99d5f40b2da9 100644 --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-insert-double.c +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-insert-double.c @@ -24,15 +24,11 @@ testd_cst (double d, vector double vd) /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mrldic\M|\mrlwinm\M} 1 } } */ -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mstxvd2x\M|\mstxv\M|\mstvx\M} 1 { target { ! has_arch_pwr7 } } } } */ -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mstfdx\M|\mstfd\M} 1 { target { ! has_arch_pwr7 } } } } */ -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mlxvd2x\M|\mlxv\M|\mlvx\M} 1 { target { ! has_arch_pwr7 } } } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mstxvd2x\M|\mstxv\M|\mstvx\M} 0 { target { lp64 } } } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mstfdx\M|\mstfd\M} 0 { target { lp64 } } } } */ -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mstxvd2x\M|\mstxv\M|\mstvx\M} 0 { target { has_arch_pwr7 && lp64 } } } } */ -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mstfdx\M|\mstfd\M} 0 { target { has_arch_pwr7 && lp64 } } } } */ - -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mlxvd2x\M|\mlxv\M|\mlvx\M} 0 { target { has_arch_pwr7 && lp64 } } } } */ -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mlxvd2x\M|\mlxv\M|\mlvx\M} 0 { target { has_arch_pwr7 && ilp32 } } } } */ -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mstxvd2x\M|\mstxv\M|\mstvx\M} 0 { target { has_arch_pwr7 && ilp32 } } } } */ -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mstfdx\M|\mstfd\M} 0 { target { has_arch_pwr7 && ilp32 } } } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mlxvd2x\M|\mlxv\M|\mlvx\M} 0 { target { lp64 } } } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mlxvd2x\M|\mlxv\M|\mlvx\M} 0 { target { ilp32 } } } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mstxvd2x\M|\mstxv\M|\mstvx\M} 0 { target { ilp32 } } } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mstfdx\M|\mstfd\M} 0 { target { ilp32 } } } } */ -- Alexandre Oliva, happy hacker https://FSFLA.org/blogs/lxo/ Free Software Activist GNU Toolchain Engineer Disinformation flourishes because many people care deeply about injustice but very few check the facts. Ask me about <https://stallmansupport.org> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-04-13 0:50 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2022-04-11 23:59 [PATCH] ppc: testsuite: test for arch_pwr7 with -mvsx in fold-vec-insert-double Alexandre Oliva 2022-04-12 18:04 ` Segher Boessenkool 2022-04-13 0:50 ` Alexandre Oliva
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).