[Bug testsuite/31589] gcc.dg/vect failures due to missing target specifiers
--- Comment #8 from tprince at computer dot org 2007-07-29 21:02 --- The patch discussed here was incorporated in mainline, and the failure was last reported 20070420. -- tprince at computer dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31589
[Bug testsuite/31589] gcc.dg/vect failures due to missing target specifiers
--- Comment #7 from dorit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-01 07:59 --- Subject: Bug 31589 Author: dorit Date: Tue May 1 07:58:59 2007 New Revision: 124315 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=124315 Log: PR testsuite/31589 * gcc.dg/vect/vect-iv-9.c: Added vect_int_mult target keyword to dg-final test. * gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-u16b.c: Added vect_pack_trunc target keyword to dg-final test. * gcc.dg/vect/vect-iv-4.c: Likewise. * gcc.dg/vect/vect-widen-mult-u16.c: Likewise. * gcc.dg/vect/pr30771.c: Added vect_unapck target keyword to dg-final test. * gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-u16a.c: Change variable type to avoid a cast. * gcc.dg/vect/no-section-anchors-vect-69.c: xfail on is64. * lib/target-supports.exp (check_effective_target_vect_widen_sum_hi_to_si): Added ia64. (check_effective_target_vect_widen_sum_qi_to_hi): Added ia64. Modified: trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/no-section-anchors-vect-69.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr30771.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-iv-4.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-iv-9.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-u16a.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-u16b.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-widen-mult-u16.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31589
[Bug testsuite/31589] gcc.dg/vect failures due to missing target specifiers
--- Comment #6 from tprince at computer dot org 2007-04-27 23:56 --- I retyped the xfail instruction after applying the patch, and now gcc.dg/vect/no-section-anchors-vect-69.c shows XFAIL as intended, with the patch Dorit posted yesterday. My patch must have been corrupted with invisible characters. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31589
[Bug testsuite/31589] gcc.dg/vect failures due to missing target specifiers
--- Comment #5 from tprince at computer dot org 2007-04-27 17:02 --- According to my test of Dorit's updated patch, the following are now PASS: vect-iv-9.c vect-iv-4.c pr30771.c The patch changed FAIL to XFAIL for the following vect-reduc-dot-u16b.c vect-widen-mult-u16.c vect-reduc-dot-u16a.c The following still reports a FAIL: PASS: gcc.dg/vect/no-section-anchors-vect-69.c (test for excess errors) Setting LD_LIBRARY_PATH to :/home/tim/src/gcc-4.3-20070413/ia64/gcc::/home/tim/src/gcc-4.3-20070413/ia64/gcc:/opt/intel/fc/9.1.045/lib:/opt/intel/mpi/3.0/lib PASS: gcc.dg/vect/no-section-anchors-vect-69.c execution test PASS: gcc.dg/vect/no-section-anchors-vect-69.c scan-tree-dump-times vectorized 4 loops 1 PASS: gcc.dg/vect/no-section-anchors-vect-69.c scan-tree-dump-times Vectorizing an unaligned access 0 FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/no-section-anchors-vect-69.c scan-tree-dump-times Alignment of access forced using peeling 3 Is it possible the xfail pattern does not match ia64-unknown-linux-gnu ? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31589
[Bug testsuite/31589] gcc.dg/vect failures due to missing target specifiers
--- Comment #4 from dorit at il dot ibm dot com 2007-04-27 05:44 --- patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-04/msg01739.html requires retesting on ia64 before I can commit it. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31589
[Bug testsuite/31589] gcc.dg/vect failures due to missing target specifiers
--- Comment #3 from tprince at computer dot org 2007-04-18 02:21 --- The patch which Dorit proposed does change the FAIL in the testsuite case vect-reduc-dot-u16a.c to XFAIL, according to my test. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31589
[Bug testsuite/31589] gcc.dg/vect failures due to missing target specifiers
--- Comment #2 from dorit at il dot ibm dot com 2007-04-17 20:10 --- > 2 more are under investigation: > no-section-anchors-vect-69.c > vect-reduc-dot-u16a.c In the first testcase, the vectorizer can only prove that the data reference in the third loop is aligned on 8 bytes. This is enough for targets like ia64 in which the vector size is 8 bytes, and therefore we don't need to peel in order to force alignment for this loop. So overall in this testcase we peel only twice. On targets that require 16byte alignment, a guaranteed 8bytes alignment is not enough, and therefore we peel this loop to align the data-reference (and overall in the testcase we peel 3 times). I guess the way to solve this is to add a keyword that lists the targets with 8byte-wide-vectors and targets with 16byte-wide-vectors, or just hard code the targets that are expected to fail/pass here. I'll sleep on it and supply a patch soon. The second test needs the same fix as a lot of the other tests: add { target vect_pack_mod } to the check. This is because the loop in main has a cast from int to short in it. However, in this testcase we already have two target keywords that we are checking: { target { vect_short_mult && vect_widen_sum_hi_to_si } }, and I don't think the testsuite engine currently provides the flexibility to and a third keyword, so I suggest to just change the loop slightly to avoid the cast (it's not the point of this testcase anyway): Index: vect-reduc-dot-u16a.c === --- vect-reduc-dot-u16a.c (revision 123909) +++ vect-reduc-dot-u16a.c (working copy) @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ int main (void) { unsigned int dot1; - int i; + unsigned short i; check_vect (); -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31589