Re: [Patch, AArch64, testsuite] PR63971: Revert test_frame_* patch.

2015-01-19 Thread Tejas Belagod 

On 19/01/15 08:53, Andrew Pinski wrote:

On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 8:18 AM, Mike Stump  wrote:

On Jan 14, 2015, at 3:50 AM, Tejas Belagod  wrote:

As agreed here (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63971), please can 
I reverse Andrew's patch 
out(https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-11/msg02916.html)?


Ok.

Unless someone objects to a reversion like this, when the author of a patch 
says it should be reverted…  that’s all the approval it needs, though, people 
can always ask for a review for any reason they want.


And now this reversal needs to be reverted.  Because the conditional
compare optimization went back in.  I figured the optimization would
go back in and that is why I did not act on reverting my patch that
fast.  The conditional compare patch went in a day after this reversal
went in ;).



Yes, now committed r219838 as obvious.

Thanks,
Tejas.
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_1.c 
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_1.c
index 5b3c0ab..b270bae 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_1.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_1.c
@@ -14,6 +14,6 @@ t_frame_pattern (test1, 200, )
 t_frame_run (test1)
 
 /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "str\tx30, \\\[sp, -\[0-9\]+\\\]!" 2 } } 
*/
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldr\tx30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 3 } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldr\tx30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 2 } } */
 
 /* { dg-final { cleanup-saved-temps } } */
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_2.c 
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_2.c
index 6ec4088..59a089c 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_2.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_2.c
@@ -15,6 +15,6 @@ t_frame_run (test2)
 
 
 /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "stp\tx19, x30, \\\[sp, -\[0-9\]+\\\]!" 1 
} } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldp\tx19, x30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 2 } 
} */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldp\tx19, x30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 1 } 
} */
 
 /* { dg-final { cleanup-saved-temps } } */
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_4.c 
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_4.c
index ebfb290..d717862 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_4.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_4.c
@@ -14,6 +14,6 @@ t_frame_pattern (test4, 400, "x19")
 t_frame_run (test4)
 
 /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "stp\tx19, x30, \\\[sp, -\[0-9\]+\\\]!" 1 
} } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldp\tx19, x30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 2 } 
} */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldp\tx19, x30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 1 } 
} */
 
 /* { dg-final { cleanup-saved-temps } } */
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_6.c 
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_6.c
index b5ea7ee..b66ce09 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_6.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_6.c
@@ -15,6 +15,6 @@ t_frame_pattern (test6, 700, )
 t_frame_run (test6)
 
 /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "str\tx30, \\\[sp, -\[0-9\]+\\\]!" 2 } } 
*/
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldr\tx30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 3 } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldr\tx30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 2 } } */
 
 /* { dg-final { cleanup-saved-temps } } */
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_7.c 
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_7.c
index daa1f42..22576c4 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_7.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_7.c
@@ -15,6 +15,6 @@ t_frame_pattern (test7, 700, "x19")
 t_frame_run (test7)
 
 /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "stp\tx19, x30, \\\[sp, -\[0-9\]+\\\]!" 1 
} } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldp\tx19, x30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 2 } 
} */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldp\tx19, x30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 1 } 
} */
 
 /* { dg-final { cleanup-saved-temps } } */

Re: [Patch, AArch64, testsuite] PR63971: Revert test_frame_* patch.

2015-01-19 Thread Andrew Pinski 
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 8:18 AM, Mike Stump  wrote:
> On Jan 14, 2015, at 3:50 AM, Tejas Belagod  wrote:
>> As agreed here (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63971), please 
>> can I reverse Andrew's patch 
>> out(https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-11/msg02916.html)?
>
> Ok.
>
> Unless someone objects to a reversion like this, when the author of a patch 
> says it should be reverted…  that’s all the approval it needs, though, people 
> can always ask for a review for any reason they want.

And now this reversal needs to be reverted.  Because the conditional
compare optimization went back in.  I figured the optimization would
go back in and that is why I did not act on reverting my patch that
fast.  The conditional compare patch went in a day after this reversal
went in ;).

Thanks,
Andrew

Re: [Patch, AArch64, testsuite] PR63971: Revert test_frame_* patch.

2015-01-15 Thread Mike Stump 
On Jan 14, 2015, at 3:50 AM, Tejas Belagod  wrote:
> As agreed here (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63971), please 
> can I reverse Andrew's patch 
> out(https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-11/msg02916.html)?

Ok.

Unless someone objects to a reversion like this, when the author of a patch 
says it should be reverted…  that’s all the approval it needs, though, people 
can always ask for a review for any reason they want.

[Patch, AArch64, testsuite] PR63971: Revert test_frame_* patch.

2015-01-14 Thread Tejas Belagod 

Hi,

As agreed here (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63971), 
please can I reverse Andrew's patch 
out(https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-11/msg02916.html)?


Tested on aarch64-none-elf, test_frame_* pass.

Thanks,
Tejas.

Changelog:

gcc/testsuite/

2015-01-14  Tejas Belagod  

PR target/63971
* gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_1.c: Revert to 3 loads of x30
in epilogue.
* gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_6.c: Likewise.
* gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_2.c: Revert to 2 pair loads of
x30 and x19 (in the epilogue).
* gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_4.c: Likewise.
* gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_7.c: Likewise.diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_1.c 
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_1.c
index b270bae..5b3c0ab 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_1.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_1.c
@@ -14,6 +14,6 @@ t_frame_pattern (test1, 200, )
 t_frame_run (test1)
 
 /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "str\tx30, \\\[sp, -\[0-9\]+\\\]!" 2 } } 
*/
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldr\tx30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 2 } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldr\tx30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 3 } } */
 
 /* { dg-final { cleanup-saved-temps } } */
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_2.c 
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_2.c
index 59a089c..6ec4088 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_2.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_2.c
@@ -15,6 +15,6 @@ t_frame_run (test2)
 
 
 /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "stp\tx19, x30, \\\[sp, -\[0-9\]+\\\]!" 1 
} } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldp\tx19, x30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 1 } 
} */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldp\tx19, x30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 2 } 
} */
 
 /* { dg-final { cleanup-saved-temps } } */
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_4.c 
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_4.c
index d717862..ebfb290 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_4.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_4.c
@@ -14,6 +14,6 @@ t_frame_pattern (test4, 400, "x19")
 t_frame_run (test4)
 
 /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "stp\tx19, x30, \\\[sp, -\[0-9\]+\\\]!" 1 
} } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldp\tx19, x30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 1 } 
} */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldp\tx19, x30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 2 } 
} */
 
 /* { dg-final { cleanup-saved-temps } } */
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_6.c 
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_6.c
index b66ce09..b5ea7ee 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_6.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_6.c
@@ -15,6 +15,6 @@ t_frame_pattern (test6, 700, )
 t_frame_run (test6)
 
 /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "str\tx30, \\\[sp, -\[0-9\]+\\\]!" 2 } } 
*/
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldr\tx30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 2 } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldr\tx30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 3 } } */
 
 /* { dg-final { cleanup-saved-temps } } */
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_7.c 
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_7.c
index 22576c4..daa1f42 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_7.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/test_frame_7.c
@@ -15,6 +15,6 @@ t_frame_pattern (test7, 700, "x19")
 t_frame_run (test7)
 
 /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "stp\tx19, x30, \\\[sp, -\[0-9\]+\\\]!" 1 
} } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldp\tx19, x30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 1 } 
} */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldp\tx19, x30, \\\[sp\\\], \[0-9\]+" 2 } 
} */
 
 /* { dg-final { cleanup-saved-temps } } */