Re: Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Fix multiple EXCESS test FAILs in RVV testsuite
>> Doesn't half of >> GCC's testsuite fail then? No. Only a few tests failed (The tests are mentioned in this patch). All other tests passed no matter how I configure toolchain building. >> I can do that at some point if you don't want it >> but right now I'm on other things. No worry, I won't commit this patch. I will use this patch in my local. You can fix it when you have time. I don't know how to fix it since I am really noob about testing. Thanks. juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai From: Robin Dapp Date: 2023-10-25 17:15 To: juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai; gcc-patches CC: rdapp.gcc; kito.cheng; Kito.cheng; jeffreyalaw Subject: Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Fix multiple EXCESS test FAILs in RVV testsuite > Hmmm. I am not familiar with Binutils... > > I just adapted tests like others in the testsuite make them consistent. > And turns out it can fix the issues.. I see where you're coming from, but can you assemble/link any executable with -march=..._zvfh? Probably not? Doesn't half of GCC's testsuite fail then? So rather than overwrite the default options we should either add an effective-target check in target-supports.exp or in those particular tests. I believe the others like compress should do the same thing. I can do that at some point if you don't want it but right now I'm on other things. Regards Robin
Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Fix multiple EXCESS test FAILs in RVV testsuite
> Hmmm. I am not familiar with Binutils... > > I just adapted tests like others in the testsuite make them consistent. > And turns out it can fix the issues.. I see where you're coming from, but can you assemble/link any executable with -march=..._zvfh? Probably not? Doesn't half of GCC's testsuite fail then? So rather than overwrite the default options we should either add an effective-target check in target-supports.exp or in those particular tests. I believe the others like compress should do the same thing. I can do that at some point if you don't want it but right now I'm on other things. Regards Robin
Re: Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Fix multiple EXCESS test FAILs in RVV testsuite
Hmmm. I am not familiar with Binutils... I just adapted tests like others in the testsuite make them consistent. And turns out it can fix the issues... juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai From: Robin Dapp Date: 2023-10-25 16:44 To: juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai; gcc-patches CC: rdapp.gcc; kito.cheng; Kito.cheng; jeffreyalaw Subject: Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Fix multiple EXCESS test FAILs in RVV testsuite > However, when I built the toolchain with -march=rv64gcv_zfh_zvfh. > Then link fail. Hmm, is it about zvfh or why does linking fail? Regards Robin
Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Fix multiple EXCESS test FAILs in RVV testsuite
> However, when I built the toolchain with -march=rv64gcv_zfh_zvfh. > Then link fail. Hmm, is it about zvfh or why does linking fail? Regards Robin
Re: Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Fix multiple EXCESS test FAILs in RVV testsuite
FAIL: gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/slp-mask-run-1.c -O3 -ftree-vectorize (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/vls-vlmax/pr110985.c -std=c99 -O3 -ftree-vectorize --param riscv-autovec-preference=fixed-vlmax check-function-bodies foo1 FAIL: gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/vls-vlmax/pr110985.c -std=c99 -O3 -ftree-vectorize --param riscv-autovec-preference=fixed-vlmax check-function-bodies foo2 FAIL: gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/vls-vlmax/pr110985.c -std=c99 -O3 -ftree-vectorize --param riscv-autovec-preference=fixed-vlmax check-function-bodies foo3 FAIL: gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/vls-vlmax/pr110985.c -std=c99 -O3 -ftree-vectorize --param riscv-autovec-preference=fixed-vlmax check-function-bodies foo4 FAIL: gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/vls-vlmax/pr110985.c -std=c99 -O3 -ftree-vectorize --param riscv-autovec-preference=fixed-vlmax check-function-bodies foo5 FAIL: gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/vls-vlmax/vec_extract-run.c -std=c99 -O3 -ftree-vectorize --param riscv-autovec-preference=fixed-vlmax (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/vls-vlmax/vec_extract-runu.c -std=c99 -O3 -ftree-vectorize --param riscv-autovec-preference=fixed-vlmax (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/vls-vlmax/vec_set-run.c -std=c99 -O3 -ftree-vectorize --param riscv-autovec-preference=fixed-vlmax (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/vmv-imm-run.c -O3 -ftree-vectorize (test for excess errors) Fix all of these FAILs juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai From: Robin Dapp Date: 2023-10-25 16:35 To: Juzhe-Zhong; gcc-patches CC: rdapp.gcc; kito.cheng; kito.cheng; jeffreyalaw Subject: Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Fix multiple EXCESS test FAILs in RVV testsuite Hi Juzhe, I guess that's OK but what's the problem here? Are the default options wrong so we need to overwrite them instead of adding some? Regards Robin
Re: Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Fix multiple EXCESS test FAILs in RVV testsuite
In rvv.exp: we specify -march=rv64gcv_zfh
However, when I built the toolchain with -march=rv64gcv_zfh_zvfh. Then link
fail.
All other tests like compress_run-1.c are works fine with :
/* { dg-options "-O3 --param riscv-autovec-preference=fixed-vlmax -Wno-psabi" }
*/
So I adapt these tests like others.
juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
From: Robin Dapp
Date: 2023-10-25 16:35
To: Juzhe-Zhong; gcc-patches
CC: rdapp.gcc; kito.cheng; kito.cheng; jeffreyalaw
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Fix multiple EXCESS test FAILs in RVV testsuite
Hi Juzhe,
I guess that's OK but what's the problem here? Are the default options
wrong so we need to overwrite them instead of adding some?
Regards
Robin
Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Fix multiple EXCESS test FAILs in RVV testsuite
Hi Juzhe, I guess that's OK but what's the problem here? Are the default options wrong so we need to overwrite them instead of adding some? Regards Robin
