Re: [PATCH] testsuite: scev: expect fail on ilp32

On Thu, 7 Dec 2023, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2023 12:58:03 +0100 (CET) > > From: Richard Biener > > > On Sat, 2 Dec 2023, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > > > Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2023 08:07:14 +0100 (CET) > > > > From: Richard Biener > > > > I read from your messages that the

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: scev: expect fail on ilp32

On 12/7/23 09:33, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2023 12:58:03 +0100 (CET) From: Richard Biener On Sat, 2 Dec 2023, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2023 08:07:14 +0100 (CET) From: Richard Biener I read from your messages that the testcases pass on arm*-*-*? Yes:

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: scev: expect fail on ilp32

> Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2023 12:58:03 +0100 (CET) > From: Richard Biener > On Sat, 2 Dec 2023, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > > Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2023 08:07:14 +0100 (CET) > > > From: Richard Biener > > > I read from your messages that the testcases pass on arm*-*-*? > > Yes: they pass (currently

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: scev: expect fail on ilp32

On Sat, 2 Dec 2023, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2023 08:07:14 +0100 (CET) > > From: Richard Biener > > > On Fri, 1 Dec 2023, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > > > > > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > > > > Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2023 18:09:10 +0100 > > > > > > Richard B.: > > > > > >

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: scev: expect fail on ilp32

> Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2023 08:07:14 +0100 (CET) > From: Richard Biener > On Fri, 1 Dec 2023, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > > > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > > > Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2023 18:09:10 +0100 > > > > Richard B.: > > > > > In the end we might need to move/duplicate the test to some > > >

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: scev: expect fail on ilp32

On Fri, 1 Dec 2023, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > > Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2023 18:09:10 +0100 > > Richard B.: > > > > In the end we might need to move/duplicate the test to some > > > > gcc.target/* dir and restrict it to a specific tuning. > > > > I intend to post

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: scev: expect fail on ilp32

> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2023 18:09:10 +0100 > I intend to post two alternative patches to get this > resolved: > 2: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/scev-[3-5].c skipped for arm*, xfailed >only on h8300-*-* and ia32. (Except as mentioned, the XPASS issue does not apply to h8300; it's

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: scev: expect fail on ilp32

> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2023 18:09:10 +0100 Richard B.: > > > In the end we might need to move/duplicate the test to some > > > gcc.target/* dir and restrict it to a specific tuning. > > I intend to post two alternative patches to get this > resolved: > 1: Move the

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: scev: expect fail on ilp32

> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2023 18:09:10 +0100 > I intend to post two alternative patches to get this > resolved: > 1: Move the tests to gcc.target/i386/scev-[3-5].c > 2: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/scev-[3-5].c skipped for arm*, xfailed >only on h8300-*-* and ia32. Correction:

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: scev: expect fail on ilp32

> From: Alexandre Oliva > Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2023 01:41:55 -0300 > On Nov 29, 2023, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > >> XPASS: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/scev-3.c scan-tree-dump-times ivopts "" 1 > >> XPASS: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/scev-4.c scan-tree-dump-times ivopts "" 1 > >> XPASS: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/scev-5.c

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: scev: expect fail on ilp32

On Thu, 30 Nov 2023, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Nov 29, 2023, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > >> XPASS: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/scev-3.c scan-tree-dump-times ivopts "" 1 > >> XPASS: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/scev-4.c scan-tree-dump-times ivopts "" 1 > >> XPASS: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/scev-5.c scan-tree-dump-times ivopts

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: scev: expect fail on ilp32

On Nov 29, 2023, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: >> XPASS: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/scev-3.c scan-tree-dump-times ivopts "" 1 >> XPASS: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/scev-4.c scan-tree-dump-times ivopts "" 1 >> XPASS: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/scev-5.c scan-tree-dump-times ivopts "" 1 > It XPASSes on the ilp32 targets I've tried -

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: scev: expect fail on ilp32

> From: Rainer Orth > Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2023 16:13:35 +0100 > 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

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: scev: expect fail on ilp32

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

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: scev: expect fail on ilp32

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

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: scev: expect fail on ilp32

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

[PATCH] testsuite: scev: expect fail on ilp32

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