Re: [RFT][patch] Fix PR testsuite/48498
On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 9:31 AM, Ira Rosen wrote:
>
>
> gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org wrote on 20/04/2011 02:24:55 PM:
>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> In gcc.dg/vect/slp-3.c and gcc.dg/vect/no-vfa-pr29145.c vectorization is
>> expected to fail on targets vect_no_align. But no realignment is
> necessary
>> here except for having the array bases aligned. This patch removes xfail
>> for vect_no_align (and increases a loop bound in slp-3.c to prevent
>> complete unrolling). It is supposed to fix the XPASSes on SPARC, I also
>> checked it with a cross-compiler on ia64-linux-gnu, and tested on
>> x86_64-suse-linux.
>>
>> vect_no_align is true for
>>
>> if { [istarget mipsisa64*-*-*]
>> || [istarget sparc*-*-*]
>> || [istarget ia64-*-*]
>> || [check_effective_target_arm_vect_no_misalign]
>> || ([istarget mips*-*-*]
>> && [check_effective_target_mips_loongson]) } {
>> set et_vect_no_align_saved 1
>> }
>>
>> so I'd appreciate testing on these targets.
>
> Was tested by Rainer on SPARC.
>
> OK to apply?
Ok.
Thanks,
Richard.
> Thanks,
> Ira
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ira
>>
>> testsuite/ChangeLog
>>
>> PR testsuite/48498
>> * gcc.dg/vect/slp-3.c: Increase loop bound. Don't expect to fail
>> on vect_no_align targets.
>> * gcc.dg/vect/no-vfa-pr29145.c: Don't expect to fail on
>> vect_no_align targets.
>>
>> Index: testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/slp-3.c
>> ===
>> --- testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/slp-3.c (revision 172765)
>> +++ testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/slp-3.c (working copy)
>> @@ -4,9 +4,9 @@
>> #include
>> #include "tree-vect.h"
>>
>> -#define N 8
>> +#define N 12
>>
>> -unsigned short in[N*8] =
>> {0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,
>> 25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,
>> 47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63};
>> +unsigned short in[N*8] =
>> {0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,
>> 25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,
>> 47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,
>> 8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31};
>>
>> int
>> main1 ()
>> @@ -142,7 +142,7 @@
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> -/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 3 loops" 1
> "vect" { xfail
>> vect_no_align } } } */
>> -/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorizing stmts using SLP" 3
>> "vect" { xfail vect_no_align } } } */
>> +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 3 loops" 1 "vect" } }
> */
>> +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorizing stmts using SLP" 3
>> "vect" } } */
>> /* { dg-final { cleanup-tree-dump "vect" } } */
>>
>> Index: testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/no-vfa-pr29145.c
>> ===
>> --- testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/no-vfa-pr29145.c (revision 172765)
>> +++ testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/no-vfa-pr29145.c (working copy)
>> @@ -48,6 +48,6 @@
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> -/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 0 loops" 2
>> "vect" { xfail vect_no_align } } } */
>> -/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 1 loops" 1
>> "vect" { xfail vect_no_align } } } */
>> +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 0 loops" 2 "vect" } }
> */
>> +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 1 loops" 1 "vect" } }
> */
>> /* { dg-final { cleanup-tree-dump "vect" } } */
>>
>
>
Re: [RFT][patch] Fix PR testsuite/48498
gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org wrote on 20/04/2011 02:24:55 PM:
>
> Hi,
>
> In gcc.dg/vect/slp-3.c and gcc.dg/vect/no-vfa-pr29145.c vectorization is
> expected to fail on targets vect_no_align. But no realignment is
necessary
> here except for having the array bases aligned. This patch removes xfail
> for vect_no_align (and increases a loop bound in slp-3.c to prevent
> complete unrolling). It is supposed to fix the XPASSes on SPARC, I also
> checked it with a cross-compiler on ia64-linux-gnu, and tested on
> x86_64-suse-linux.
>
> vect_no_align is true for
>
> if { [istarget mipsisa64*-*-*]
> || [istarget sparc*-*-*]
> || [istarget ia64-*-*]
> || [check_effective_target_arm_vect_no_misalign]
> || ([istarget mips*-*-*]
> && [check_effective_target_mips_loongson]) } {
> set et_vect_no_align_saved 1
> }
>
> so I'd appreciate testing on these targets.
Was tested by Rainer on SPARC.
OK to apply?
Thanks,
Ira
>
> Thanks,
> Ira
>
> testsuite/ChangeLog
>
>PR testsuite/48498
> * gcc.dg/vect/slp-3.c: Increase loop bound. Don't expect to fail
>on vect_no_align targets.
>* gcc.dg/vect/no-vfa-pr29145.c: Don't expect to fail on
>vect_no_align targets.
>
> Index: testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/slp-3.c
> ===
> --- testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/slp-3.c (revision 172765)
> +++ testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/slp-3.c (working copy)
> @@ -4,9 +4,9 @@
> #include
> #include "tree-vect.h"
>
> -#define N 8
> +#define N 12
>
> -unsigned short in[N*8] =
> {0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,
> 25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,
> 47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63};
> +unsigned short in[N*8] =
> {0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,
> 25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,
> 47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,
> 8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31};
>
> int
> main1 ()
> @@ -142,7 +142,7 @@
>return 0;
> }
>
> -/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 3 loops" 1
"vect" { xfail
> vect_no_align } } } */
> -/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorizing stmts using SLP" 3
> "vect" { xfail vect_no_align } } } */
> +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 3 loops" 1 "vect" } }
*/
> +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorizing stmts using SLP" 3
> "vect" } } */
> /* { dg-final { cleanup-tree-dump "vect" } } */
>
> Index: testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/no-vfa-pr29145.c
> ===
> --- testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/no-vfa-pr29145.c (revision 172765)
> +++ testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/no-vfa-pr29145.c (working copy)
> @@ -48,6 +48,6 @@
>return 0;
> }
>
> -/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 0 loops" 2
> "vect" { xfail vect_no_align } } } */
> -/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 1 loops" 1
> "vect" { xfail vect_no_align } } } */
> +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 0 loops" 2 "vect" } }
*/
> +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 1 loops" 1 "vect" } }
*/
> /* { dg-final { cleanup-tree-dump "vect" } } */
>
[RFT][patch] Fix PR testsuite/48498
Hi,
In gcc.dg/vect/slp-3.c and gcc.dg/vect/no-vfa-pr29145.c vectorization is
expected to fail on targets vect_no_align. But no realignment is necessary
here except for having the array bases aligned. This patch removes xfail
for vect_no_align (and increases a loop bound in slp-3.c to prevent
complete unrolling). It is supposed to fix the XPASSes on SPARC, I also
checked it with a cross-compiler on ia64-linux-gnu, and tested on
x86_64-suse-linux.
vect_no_align is true for
if { [istarget mipsisa64*-*-*]
|| [istarget sparc*-*-*]
|| [istarget ia64-*-*]
|| [check_effective_target_arm_vect_no_misalign]
|| ([istarget mips*-*-*]
&& [check_effective_target_mips_loongson]) } {
set et_vect_no_align_saved 1
}
so I'd appreciate testing on these targets.
Thanks,
Ira
testsuite/ChangeLog
PR testsuite/48498
* gcc.dg/vect/slp-3.c: Increase loop bound. Don't expect to fail
on vect_no_align targets.
* gcc.dg/vect/no-vfa-pr29145.c: Don't expect to fail on
vect_no_align targets.
Index: testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/slp-3.c
===
--- testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/slp-3.c (revision 172765)
+++ testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/slp-3.c (working copy)
@@ -4,9 +4,9 @@
#include
#include "tree-vect.h"
-#define N 8
+#define N 12
-unsigned short in[N*8] =
{0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63};
+unsigned short in[N*8] =
{0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31};
int
main1 ()
@@ -142,7 +142,7 @@
return 0;
}
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 3 loops" 1 "vect" { xfail
vect_no_align } } } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorizing stmts using SLP" 3
"vect" { xfail vect_no_align } } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 3 loops" 1 "vect" } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorizing stmts using SLP" 3
"vect" } } */
/* { dg-final { cleanup-tree-dump "vect" } } */
Index: testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/no-vfa-pr29145.c
===
--- testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/no-vfa-pr29145.c (revision 172765)
+++ testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/no-vfa-pr29145.c (working copy)
@@ -48,6 +48,6 @@
return 0;
}
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 0 loops" 2
"vect" { xfail vect_no_align } } } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 1 loops" 1
"vect" { xfail vect_no_align } } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 0 loops" 2 "vect" } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 1 loops" 1 "vect" } } */
/* { dg-final { cleanup-tree-dump "vect" } } */
