Thanks a lot ! I will send V2 for Richi to review.
juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
From: Andrew Stubbs
Date: 2023-11-07 20:05
To: juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai; gcc-patches
CC: jeffreyalaw; rguenther
Subject: Re: [PATCH] test: Fix FAIL of pr97428.c for RVV
On 07/11/2023 12:03, juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai wrote:
> Sorry I made a mistake here.
>
> Does it work for you ?
>
> /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorizing stmts using SLP" 2
> "vect" { target { { vect_hw_misalign } && { ! vect512 } } } } } */
> /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorizing stmts using SLP" 4
> "vect" { target { vect512 } } } } */
>
> Tested on RVV is OK.
5 PASS on amdgcn also.
Andrew
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
>
> *From:* Andrew Stubbs <mailto:a...@codesourcery.com>
> *Date:* 2023-11-07 19:44
> *To:* juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai <mailto:juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai>;
> gcc-patches <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
> *CC:* jeffreyalaw <mailto:jeffreya...@gmail.com>; rguenther
> <mailto:rguent...@suse.de>
> *Subject:* Re: [PATCH] test: Fix FAIL of pr97428.c for RVV
> On 07/11/2023 11:24, juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai wrote:
> > Oh. Sorry maybe it's better like this:
> >
> > /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorizing stmts using SLP" 2
> > "vect" { target { { ! vect_hw_misalign } || { vect512 } } } } } */
> > /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorizing stmts using SLP" 4
> > "vect" { target{ ! vect512 } } } } */
> The conditions are backwards; this expects vect512 machines to match
> twice. Also I think there's a space missing.
> Andrew
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
> >
> > *From:* juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai <mailto:juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai>
> > *Date:* 2023-11-07 19:23
> > *To:* ams <mailto:a...@codesourcery.com>; gcc-patches
> > <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
> > *CC:* jeffreyalaw <mailto:jeffreya...@gmail.com>; rguenther
> > <mailto:rguent...@suse.de>
> > *Subject:* Re: Re: [PATCH] test: Fix FAIL of pr97428.c for RVV
> > Do you mean this ?
> >
> > /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorizing stmts using
> SLP" 2
> > "vect" { target { { ! vect_hw_misalign } || { vect512 } } } }
> } */
> > /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorizing stmts using
> SLP" 4
> > "vect" { xfail { ! vect512 } } } } */
> >
> > Could you try again ? If it works for you, I am gonna send V2
> patch
> > to Richi.
> >
> > Thank you so much for help.
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
> >
> > *From:* Andrew Stubbs <mailto:a...@codesourcery.com>
> > *Date:* 2023-11-07 19:21
> > *To:* juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai <mailto:juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai>;
> > gcc-patches <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
> > *CC:* jeffreyalaw <mailto:jeffreya...@gmail.com>; rguenther
> > <mailto:rguent...@suse.de>
> > *Subject:* Re: [PATCH] test: Fix FAIL of pr97428.c for RVV
> > On 07/11/2023 11:05, juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai wrote:
> > > Could you try this ?
> > >
> > > /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorizing
> stmts using
> > SLP" 2
> > > "vect" { xfail { { ! vect_hw_misalign } || { vect512 }
> } } } } */
> > > /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorizing
> stmts using
> > SLP" 4
> > > "vect" { xfail { ! vect512 } } } } */
> > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c (test for excess errors)
> > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump vect "Detected
> > interleaving
> > load of size 8"
> > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump vect "Detected
> > interleaving
> > store of size 16"
> > gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c: pattern found 4 times
> > XFAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump-times vect
> "vectorizing
> > stmts using SLP" 2
> > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump-times vect
> > "vectorizing stmts
> > using SLP" 4
> > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump-not vect "gap of 6
> > elements"
> > The passes are all correct (assuming that 4 matches are a
> valid
> > number),
> > but if you have mutliple patterns with contractictory
> > expectations then
> > you probably want to use "target" rather than "xfail" to
> avoid
> > the noise
> > (and invert the conditions, obviously).
> > Andrew
> > >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
> > >
> > > *From:* Andrew Stubbs <mailto:a...@codesourcery.com>
> > > *Date:* 2023-11-07 18:59
> > > *To:* juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
> <mailto:juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai>;
> > > gcc-patches <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
> > > *CC:* jeffreyalaw <mailto:jeffreya...@gmail.com>;
> rguenther
> > > <mailto:rguent...@suse.de>
> > > *Subject:* Re: [PATCH] test: Fix FAIL of pr97428.c
> for RVV
> > > On 07/11/2023 10:10, juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai wrote:
> > > > So, this patch not only fixes RVV FAIL, but
> also fixes
> > GCN ?
> > > Before the patch I have:
> > > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c (test for excess errors)
> > > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump vect
> "Detected
> > interleaving
> > > load of size 8"
> > > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump vect
> "Detected
> > interleaving
> > > store of size 16"
> > > gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c: pattern found 4 times
> > > XFAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump-times vect
> > "vectorizing
> > > stmts using SLP" 2
> > > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump-not
> vect "gap
> > of 6 elements"
> > > With the patch I now get:
> > > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c (test for excess errors)
> > > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump vect
> "Detected
> > interleaving
> > > load of size 8"
> > > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump vect
> "Detected
> > interleaving
> > > store of size 16"
> > > gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c: pattern found 4 times
> > > XFAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump-times vect
> > "vectorizing
> > > stmts using SLP" 2
> > > XPASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump-times vect
> > "vectorizing
> > > stmts using SLP" 4
> > > PASS: gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c scan-tree-dump-not
> vect "gap
> > of 6 elements"
> > > It's different, but not "fixed".
> > > Andrew
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
> > > >
> > > > *From:* Andrew Stubbs
> <mailto:a...@codesourcery.com>
> > > > *Date:* 2023-11-07 18:09
> > > > *To:* Juzhe-Zhong
> <mailto:juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai>;
> > > > gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> > <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
> > > > *CC:* jeffreya...@gmail.com
> > <mailto:jeffreya...@gmail.com>;
> > > > rguent...@suse.de <mailto:rguent...@suse.de>
> > > > *Subject:* Re: [PATCH] test: Fix FAIL of
> pr97428.c
> > for RVV
> > > > On 07/11/2023 07:44, Juzhe-Zhong wrote:
> > > > > This test shows vectorizing stmts using
> SLP 4 times
> > > instead of 2
> > > > for RVV.
> > > > > The reason is RVV has 512 bit vector.
> > > > > Here is comparison between RVV ans ARM SVE:
> > > > > https://godbolt.org/z/xc5KE5rPs
> > > > >
> > > > > But I notice AMDGCN also has 512 bit vector,
> > seems this patch
> > > > will cause FAIL in GCN ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Not sure whether GCN is 2 times or 4 times ?
> > > > The pattern matches 4 times on GCN.
> > > > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
> > > > >
> > > > > * gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c: Fix FAIL for RVV.
> > > > >
> > > > > ---
> > > > > gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c |
> 3 ++-
> > > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1
> deletion(-)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git
> a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c
> > > > b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c
> > > > > index ad6416096aa..352c9bf04a7 100644
> > > > > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c
> > > > > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr97428.c
> > > > > @@ -43,5 +43,6 @@ void foo_i2(dcmlx4_t
> dst[],
> > const dcmlx_t
> > > > src[], int n)
> > > > > /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump "Detected
> > interleaving
> > > store of
> > > > size 16" "vect" } } */
> > > > > /* We're not able to peel & apply
> re-aligning
> > to make
> > > accesses
> > > > well-aligned for !vect_hw_misalign,
> > > > > but we could by peeling the stores for
> > alignment and
> > > > applying re-aligning loads. */
> > > > > -/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times
> > "vectorizing stmts using
> > > > SLP" 2 "vect" { xfail { ! vect_hw_misalign
> } } } } */
> > > > > +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times
> > "vectorizing stmts using
> > > > SLP" 2 "vect" { xfail { { !
> vect_hw_misalign } ||
> > { vect512 }
> > > } } } } */
> > > > > +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times
> > "vectorizing stmts using
> > > > SLP" 4 "vect" { xfail { { !
> vect_hw_misalign } ||
> > { ! vect512
> > > } } }
> > > > } } */
> > > > > /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-not
> "gap of 6
> > elements"
> > > "vect" }
> > > > } */
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
