Re: Re: [PATCH v4] RISC-V: Fixbug for fsflags instruction error using immediate.

2023-07-26 Thread Kito Cheng via Gcc-patches 
commit, thanks :)

On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 3:39 PM Kito Cheng  wrote:
>
> Oh, yeah, my bad, there is no fscsri, gonna test and push :)
>
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 3:20 PM juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
>  wrote:
> >
> > I just checked SPEC:
> >
> > fscsr rd, rs csrrw rd, fcsr, rs
> > Swap FP control/status register
> > fscsr rs csrrw x0, fcsr, rs
> > Write FP control/status register
> >
> > It seems that fscsr doesn't have immediate form? I am not sure.
> >
> >
> > juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
> >
> > From: Kito Cheng
> > Date: 2023-07-26 15:07
> > To: Jin Ma
> > CC: gcc-patches; jeffreyalaw; palmer; richard.sandiford; philipp.tomsich; 
> > christoph.muellner; rdapp.gcc; juzhe.zhong; jinma.contrib
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] RISC-V: Fixbug for fsflags instruction error using 
> > immediate.
> > On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 1:41 PM Jin Ma via Gcc-patches
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > The pattern mistakenly believes that fsflags can use immediate numbers,
> > > but in fact it does not support it. Immediate numbers should use fsflagsi.
> > >
> > > For example:
> > > __builtin_riscv_fsflags(4);
> > >
> > > The following error occurred.
> > > /tmp/ccoWdWqT.s: Assembler messages:
> > > /tmp/ccoWdWqT.s:14: Error: illegal operands `fsflags 4'
> > >
> > > gcc/ChangeLog:
> > >
> > > * config/riscv/riscv.md: Likewise.
> > >
> > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
> > >
> > > * gcc.target/riscv/fsflags.c: New test.
> > > ---
> > >  gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md|  4 ++--
> > >  gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/fsflags.c | 16 
> > >  2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >  create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/fsflags.c
> > >
> > > diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md
> > > index 4615e811947..24515bcf706 100644
> > > --- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md
> > > +++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md
> > > @@ -3074,7 +3074,7 @@ (define_insn "riscv_frcsr"
> > >"frcsr\t%0")
> > >
> > >  (define_insn "riscv_fscsr"
> > > -  [(unspec_volatile [(match_operand:SI 0 "csr_operand" "rK")] 
> > > UNSPECV_FSCSR)]
> > > +  [(unspec_volatile [(match_operand:SI 0 "register_operand" "r")] 
> > > UNSPECV_FSCSR)]
> > >"TARGET_HARD_FLOAT || TARGET_ZFINX"
> > >"fscsr\t%0")
> >
> > Wait, this patch still drops K?
> >

Re: Re: [PATCH v4] RISC-V: Fixbug for fsflags instruction error using immediate.

2023-07-26 Thread Kito Cheng via Gcc-patches 
Oh, yeah, my bad, there is no fscsri, gonna test and push :)

On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 3:20 PM juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
 wrote:
>
> I just checked SPEC:
>
> fscsr rd, rs csrrw rd, fcsr, rs
> Swap FP control/status register
> fscsr rs csrrw x0, fcsr, rs
> Write FP control/status register
>
> It seems that fscsr doesn't have immediate form? I am not sure.
>
>
> juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
>
> From: Kito Cheng
> Date: 2023-07-26 15:07
> To: Jin Ma
> CC: gcc-patches; jeffreyalaw; palmer; richard.sandiford; philipp.tomsich; 
> christoph.muellner; rdapp.gcc; juzhe.zhong; jinma.contrib
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] RISC-V: Fixbug for fsflags instruction error using 
> immediate.
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 1:41 PM Jin Ma via Gcc-patches
>  wrote:
> >
> > The pattern mistakenly believes that fsflags can use immediate numbers,
> > but in fact it does not support it. Immediate numbers should use fsflagsi.
> >
> > For example:
> > __builtin_riscv_fsflags(4);
> >
> > The following error occurred.
> > /tmp/ccoWdWqT.s: Assembler messages:
> > /tmp/ccoWdWqT.s:14: Error: illegal operands `fsflags 4'
> >
> > gcc/ChangeLog:
> >
> > * config/riscv/riscv.md: Likewise.
> >
> > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
> >
> > * gcc.target/riscv/fsflags.c: New test.
> > ---
> >  gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md|  4 ++--
> >  gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/fsflags.c | 16 
> >  2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >  create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/fsflags.c
> >
> > diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md
> > index 4615e811947..24515bcf706 100644
> > --- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md
> > +++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md
> > @@ -3074,7 +3074,7 @@ (define_insn "riscv_frcsr"
> >"frcsr\t%0")
> >
> >  (define_insn "riscv_fscsr"
> > -  [(unspec_volatile [(match_operand:SI 0 "csr_operand" "rK")] 
> > UNSPECV_FSCSR)]
> > +  [(unspec_volatile [(match_operand:SI 0 "register_operand" "r")] 
> > UNSPECV_FSCSR)]
> >"TARGET_HARD_FLOAT || TARGET_ZFINX"
> >"fscsr\t%0")
>
> Wait, this patch still drops K?
>

Re: Re: [PATCH v4] RISC-V: Fixbug for fsflags instruction error using immediate.

2023-07-26 Thread juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai 
I just checked SPEC:

fscsr rd, rs csrrw rd, fcsr, rs 
Swap FP control/status register 
fscsr rs csrrw x0, fcsr, rs 
Write FP control/status register 

It seems that fscsr doesn't have immediate form? I am not sure.


juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
 
From: Kito Cheng
Date: 2023-07-26 15:07
To: Jin Ma
CC: gcc-patches; jeffreyalaw; palmer; richard.sandiford; philipp.tomsich; 
christoph.muellner; rdapp.gcc; juzhe.zhong; jinma.contrib
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] RISC-V: Fixbug for fsflags instruction error using 
immediate.
On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 1:41 PM Jin Ma via Gcc-patches
 wrote:
>
> The pattern mistakenly believes that fsflags can use immediate numbers,
> but in fact it does not support it. Immediate numbers should use fsflagsi.
>
> For example:
> __builtin_riscv_fsflags(4);
>
> The following error occurred.
> /tmp/ccoWdWqT.s: Assembler messages:
> /tmp/ccoWdWqT.s:14: Error: illegal operands `fsflags 4'
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> * config/riscv/riscv.md: Likewise.
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>
> * gcc.target/riscv/fsflags.c: New test.
> ---
>  gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md|  4 ++--
>  gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/fsflags.c | 16 
>  2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/fsflags.c
>
> diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md
> index 4615e811947..24515bcf706 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md
> +++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md
> @@ -3074,7 +3074,7 @@ (define_insn "riscv_frcsr"
>"frcsr\t%0")
>
>  (define_insn "riscv_fscsr"
> -  [(unspec_volatile [(match_operand:SI 0 "csr_operand" "rK")] UNSPECV_FSCSR)]
> +  [(unspec_volatile [(match_operand:SI 0 "register_operand" "r")] 
> UNSPECV_FSCSR)]
>"TARGET_HARD_FLOAT || TARGET_ZFINX"
>"fscsr\t%0")
 
Wait, this patch still drops K?

Re: [PATCH v4] RISC-V: Fixbug for fsflags instruction error using immediate.

2023-07-26 Thread Kito Cheng via Gcc-patches 
On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 1:41 PM Jin Ma via Gcc-patches
 wrote:
>
> The pattern mistakenly believes that fsflags can use immediate numbers,
> but in fact it does not support it. Immediate numbers should use fsflagsi.
>
> For example:
> __builtin_riscv_fsflags(4);
>
> The following error occurred.
> /tmp/ccoWdWqT.s: Assembler messages:
> /tmp/ccoWdWqT.s:14: Error: illegal operands `fsflags 4'
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> * config/riscv/riscv.md: Likewise.
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>
> * gcc.target/riscv/fsflags.c: New test.
> ---
>  gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md|  4 ++--
>  gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/fsflags.c | 16 
>  2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/fsflags.c
>
> diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md
> index 4615e811947..24515bcf706 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md
> +++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md
> @@ -3074,7 +3074,7 @@ (define_insn "riscv_frcsr"
>"frcsr\t%0")
>
>  (define_insn "riscv_fscsr"
> -  [(unspec_volatile [(match_operand:SI 0 "csr_operand" "rK")] UNSPECV_FSCSR)]
> +  [(unspec_volatile [(match_operand:SI 0 "register_operand" "r")] 
> UNSPECV_FSCSR)]
>"TARGET_HARD_FLOAT || TARGET_ZFINX"
>"fscsr\t%0")

Wait, this patch still drops K?

Re: [PATCH v4] RISC-V: Fixbug for fsflags instruction error using immediate.

2023-07-25 Thread juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai 
LGTM. 
Thanks for fixing it.


juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
 
From: Jin Ma
Date: 2023-07-26 13:41
To: gcc-patches
CC: jeffreyalaw; palmer; richard.sandiford; kito.cheng; philipp.tomsich; 
christoph.muellner; rdapp.gcc; juzhe.zhong; jinma.contrib; Jin Ma
Subject: [PATCH v4] RISC-V: Fixbug for fsflags instruction error using 
immediate.
The pattern mistakenly believes that fsflags can use immediate numbers,
but in fact it does not support it. Immediate numbers should use fsflagsi.
 
For example:
__builtin_riscv_fsflags(4);
 
The following error occurred.
/tmp/ccoWdWqT.s: Assembler messages:
/tmp/ccoWdWqT.s:14: Error: illegal operands `fsflags 4'
 
gcc/ChangeLog:
 
* config/riscv/riscv.md: Likewise.
 
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
 
* gcc.target/riscv/fsflags.c: New test.
---
gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md|  4 ++--
gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/fsflags.c | 16 
2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/fsflags.c
 
diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md
index 4615e811947..24515bcf706 100644
--- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md
+++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md
@@ -3074,7 +3074,7 @@ (define_insn "riscv_frcsr"
   "frcsr\t%0")
(define_insn "riscv_fscsr"
-  [(unspec_volatile [(match_operand:SI 0 "csr_operand" "rK")] UNSPECV_FSCSR)]
+  [(unspec_volatile [(match_operand:SI 0 "register_operand" "r")] 
UNSPECV_FSCSR)]
   "TARGET_HARD_FLOAT || TARGET_ZFINX"
   "fscsr\t%0")
@@ -3087,7 +3087,7 @@ (define_insn "riscv_frflags"
(define_insn "riscv_fsflags"
   [(unspec_volatile [(match_operand:SI 0 "csr_operand" "rK")] UNSPECV_FSFLAGS)]
   "TARGET_HARD_FLOAT || TARGET_ZFINX"
-  "fsflags\t%0")
+  "fsflags%i0\t%0")
(define_insn "*riscv_fsnvsnan2"
   [(unspec_volatile [(match_operand:ANYF 0 "register_operand" "f")
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/fsflags.c 
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/fsflags.c
new file mode 100644
index 000..74a97b8a7c7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/fsflags.c
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+/* Verify that fsflags is using the correct register or immediate.  */
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-require-effective-target hard_float } */
+/* { dg-options "-O" } */
+
+void foo1 (int a)
+{
+   __builtin_riscv_fsflags(a);
+}
+void foo2 ()
+{
+   __builtin_riscv_fsflags(4);
+}
+
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "fsflags\t" 1 } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "fsflagsi\t" 1 } } */
-- 
2.17.1

[PATCH v4] RISC-V: Fixbug for fsflags instruction error using immediate.

2023-07-25 Thread Jin Ma via Gcc-patches 
The pattern mistakenly believes that fsflags can use immediate numbers,
but in fact it does not support it. Immediate numbers should use fsflagsi.

For example:
__builtin_riscv_fsflags(4);

The following error occurred.
/tmp/ccoWdWqT.s: Assembler messages:
/tmp/ccoWdWqT.s:14: Error: illegal operands `fsflags 4'

gcc/ChangeLog:

* config/riscv/riscv.md: Likewise.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

* gcc.target/riscv/fsflags.c: New test.
---
 gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md|  4 ++--
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/fsflags.c | 16 
 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/fsflags.c

diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md
index 4615e811947..24515bcf706 100644
--- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md
+++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md
@@ -3074,7 +3074,7 @@ (define_insn "riscv_frcsr"
   "frcsr\t%0")
 
 (define_insn "riscv_fscsr"
-  [(unspec_volatile [(match_operand:SI 0 "csr_operand" "rK")] UNSPECV_FSCSR)]
+  [(unspec_volatile [(match_operand:SI 0 "register_operand" "r")] 
UNSPECV_FSCSR)]
   "TARGET_HARD_FLOAT || TARGET_ZFINX"
   "fscsr\t%0")
 
@@ -3087,7 +3087,7 @@ (define_insn "riscv_frflags"
 (define_insn "riscv_fsflags"
   [(unspec_volatile [(match_operand:SI 0 "csr_operand" "rK")] UNSPECV_FSFLAGS)]
   "TARGET_HARD_FLOAT || TARGET_ZFINX"
-  "fsflags\t%0")
+  "fsflags%i0\t%0")
 
 (define_insn "*riscv_fsnvsnan2"
   [(unspec_volatile [(match_operand:ANYF 0 "register_operand" "f")
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/fsflags.c 
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/fsflags.c
new file mode 100644
index 000..74a97b8a7c7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/fsflags.c
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+/* Verify that fsflags is using the correct register or immediate.  */
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-require-effective-target hard_float } */
+/* { dg-options "-O" } */
+
+void foo1 (int a)
+{
+   __builtin_riscv_fsflags(a);
+}
+void foo2 ()
+{
+   __builtin_riscv_fsflags(4);
+}
+
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "fsflags\t" 1 } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "fsflagsi\t" 1 } } */
-- 
2.17.1