On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 7:45 AM, Gopalasubramanian, Ganesh
<ganesh.gopalasubraman...@amd.com> wrote:
>> Hopefully someone from AMD will provide tests that are mysteriously missing 
>> from XOP testsuite.
>
> As pointed out by Marc, I added myself to the bug later.
> I was bit confused about the "internal insn representation" with 
> "user-visible function".
> So, couldn't add test then and there. I could have solved that earlier. Sorry 
> for that.
>
> Attached is the test that checks the (controversial) "frcz" functions.
>
> Uros could you please add this to your patch while committing.

Thanks, I have changed the patch slightly to skip runtime test on
non-xop machines.

2013-11-27  Uros Bizjak  <ubiz...@gmail.com>
        Ganesh Gopalasubramanian  <ganesh.gopalasubraman...@amd.com>

    PR target/56788
    * gcc.target/i386/xop-frczX.c: New test.

Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu {,-m32} and committed to mainline SVN.

Uros.
Index: gcc.target/i386/xop-frczX.c
===================================================================
--- gcc.target/i386/xop-frczX.c (revision 0)
+++ gcc.target/i386/xop-frczX.c (working copy)
@@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
+/* { dg-do run } */
+/* { dg-require-effective-target xop } */
+/* { dg-options "-O2 -mxop" } */
+
+#include "xop-check.h"
+
+#include <x86intrin.h>
+
+void
+check_mm_vmfrcz_sd (__m128d __A, __m128d __B)
+{
+  union128d a, b, c;
+  double d[2];
+
+  a.x = __A;
+  b.x = __B;
+  c.x = _mm_frcz_sd (__A, __B);
+  d[0] = b.a[0] - (int)b.a[0] ;
+  d[1] = a.a[1];
+  if (check_union128d (c, d))
+    abort ();
+}
+
+void
+check_mm_vmfrcz_ss (__m128 __A, __m128 __B)
+{
+  union128 a, b, c;
+  float f[4];
+
+  a.x = __A;
+  b.x = __B;
+  c.x = _mm_frcz_ss (__A, __B);
+  f[0] = b.a[0] - (int)b.a[0] ;
+  f[1] = a.a[1];
+  f[2] = a.a[2];
+  f[3] = a.a[3];
+  if (check_union128 (c, f))
+    abort ();
+}
+
+static void
+xop_test (void)
+{
+  union128 a, b;
+  union128d c,d;
+  int i;
+
+  for (i = 0; i < 4; i++)
+    {
+       a.a[i] = i + 3.5;
+       b.a[i] = i + 7.9;
+    }
+  for (i = 0; i < 2; i++)
+    {
+       c.a[i] = i + 3.5;
+       d.a[i] = i + 7.987654321;
+    }
+  check_mm_vmfrcz_ss (a.x, b.x);
+  check_mm_vmfrcz_sd (c.x, d.x);
+}

Reply via email to