On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 11:10:12PM +0000, Christophe Lyon wrote: > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/mve/pr114801.c > @@ -0,0 +1,36 @@ > +/* { dg-do compile } */ > +/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_v8_1m_mve_ok } */ > +/* { dg-add-options arm_v8_1m_mve } */ > +/* { dg-final { check-function-bodies "**" "" "" } } */ > + > +#include <arm_mve.h> > + > +/* > +** test_32: > +**... > +** mov r[0-9]+, #65535 @ movhi > +**... > +*/ > +uint32x4_t test_32() { > + return vdupq_m_n_u32(vdupq_n_u32(0), 0, 0xcccc);
Just a testcase nit. I think testing 0xcccc isn't that useful, it tests the same 4 bits 4 times. Might be more interesting to test 4 different 4 bit elements, one of them 0 (to verify it doesn't turn that into all ones), one all 1s (that is the other valid case) and then 2 random other values in between. > +} > + > +/* > +** test_16: > +**... > +** mov r[0-9]+, #52428 @ movhi > +**... > +*/ > +uint16x8_t test_16() { > + return vdupq_m_n_u16(vdupq_n_u16(0), 0, 0xcccc); And for these it can actually test all 4 possible 2 bit elements, so say 0x3021 > +} > + > +/* > +** test_8: > +**... > +** mov r[0-9]+, #52428 @ movhi > +**... > +*/ > +uint8x16_t test_8() { > + return vdupq_m_n_u8(vdupq_n_u8(0), 0, 0xcccc); and here use some random pattern. BTW, the patch is ok for 14.1 if it is approved and committed today (so that it can be cherry-picked tomorrow morning at latest to the branch). Jakub