From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE [129.70.160.84]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B688A3858C54 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 2023 15:13:37 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org B688A3858C54 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org B688A3858C54 Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=129.70.160.84 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1701184420; cv=none; b=EZVckp6Wr2XxGUWXM/YXbUCLJ19AIo0QlJnFx/hGWVKryOTdzTFGdUdjz1l7+XnesTSJsg5DxVMBX/sU2V3XdRmXd7B9EC0EWK8E0ttPYs8fRGmsfYoSx+HnSDh/40c41CJzALZEfoDYGKe+xhUo1OJ5ZvBDG/q/EVqgSbnZXP8= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1701184420; c=relaxed/simple; bh=FN/BCLxHUfGQwRecfCtmCsmEF7cq7kff3gBHWi1nv2g=; h=DKIM-Signature:From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=fBhXLZ/ku6dQgUrIbzfAH6/BQPjWoZm2mwYP4FweYN0ayISvQjHM11e61GyQl6c2buYqXahVTxADBAaFEfM1Y2FufzOqxylz/PQ/d2OGMSXcnJr84HqAu+Y6qeU+1jB/c7i+iDY4muKrQ+wjraOYQ1yGNuD0tTMfiwgBYZiSKHE= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE507C09F2; Tue, 28 Nov 2023 16:13:36 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d= cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de; h=content-type:content-type :mime-version:user-agent:message-id:in-reply-to:date:date :references:subject:subject:from:from:received:received; s= 20200306; t=1701184416; bh=FN/BCLxHUfGQwRecfCtmCsmEF7cq7kff3gBHW i1nv2g=; b=Dph61eqWZyfEYp7qtL85InBucfop1nQlHczEef7SFbQb9n96jAFhX AO+h0tFfOEByzdGSrZbJ9kM+mRFBFD/AG1RSomdAtaL7teTWCKVOPdGhbBlfo7V6 MV9r54Qp/AMcUGA8dZBthf0rFP37/JUd1wVmb4wguP9QCMTsuMMc8IhbsyeXryFa qJPdTVtnLmEq74ZATFY3BPc4fSLSaQLB+0i55UPqnwQXbTsNVrtqAEfDdz7dSVJW +H8vTpIv9bxiamQxJqKyqFdTGEmbHwaiVnQSLeqKi7j0sak8r3P+CXlx33qf1UNW +LmJYcMJtx1v8klgIMep8c/5mHKSzoesA== X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de Received: from smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id 844Q4QYlb8r7; Tue, 28 Nov 2023 16:13:36 +0100 (CET) Received: from manam.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (p4fddb508.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [79.221.181.8]) (Authenticated sender: ro) by smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C8338C1000; Tue, 28 Nov 2023 16:13:35 +0100 (CET) From: Rainer Orth To: Richard Biener Cc: Jeff Law , Alexandre Oliva , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Mike Stump Subject: Re: [PATCH] testsuite: scev: expect fail on ilp32 References: <6f1516e7-f4be-4e13-b04c-8b5c31cae4f7@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2023 16:13:35 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Richard Biener's message of "Mon, 20 Nov 2023 07:35:13 +0000 (UTC)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1.90 (usg-unix-v) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3785.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,KAM_NUMSUBJECT,KAM_SHORT,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: Richard Biener writes: > On Sun, 19 Nov 2023, Jeff Law wrote: > >> >> >> On 11/19/23 00:30, Alexandre Oliva wrote: >> > >> > I've recently patched scev-3.c and scev-5.c because it only passed by >> > accident on ia32. It also fails on some (but not all) arm-eabi >> > variants. It seems hard to characterize the conditions in which the >> > optimization is supposed to pass, but expecting them to fail on ilp32 >> > targets, though probably a little excessive and possibly noisy, is not >> > quite as alarming as getting a fail in test reports, so I propose >> > changing the xfail marker from ia32 to ilp32. >> > >> > I'm also proposing to add a similar marker to scev-4.c. Though it >> > doesn't appear to be failing for me, I've got reports that suggest it >> > still does for others, and it certainly did for us as well. >> > >> > Regstrapped on x86_64-linux-gnu, also tested on arm-eabi with default >> > cpu on trunk, and with tms570 on gcc-13. Ok to install? >> > >> > >> > for gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog >> > >> > * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/scev-3.c: xfail on all ilp32 targets, >> > though some of these do pass. >> > * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/scev-4.c: Likewise. >> > * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/scev-5.c: Likewise. >> OK. Though hopefully someone will figure out what properties actually cause >> the differences so that we can do the right thing without the noisy XPASS at >> some point. > > The tests all test IVOPTs induction variable selecting results > (assuming every target would come to the "obvious" conclusion), > so it's probably not only target but also sub-target (aka -mtune) > sensitive ... > > In the end we might need to move/duplicate the test to some > gcc.target/* dir and restrict it to a specific tuning. FWIW, since Alexandre's patch all three tests XPASS on 32-bit Solaris/SPARC: XPASS: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/scev-3.c scan-tree-dump-times ivopts "&a" 1 XPASS: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/scev-4.c scan-tree-dump-times ivopts "&a" 1 XPASS: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/scev-5.c scan-tree-dump-times ivopts "&a" 1 Rainer -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University