Re: [PATCH 4/4] Un-XFAIL ssa-dom-cse-2.c for most platforms

[Alan Lawrence <alan dot lawrence at foss dot arm dot com>]

On 21/12/15 14:59, Bill Schmidt wrote:

> > > On powerpc64, the test passes with -mcpu=power8 (the loop is vectorized as a
> > > reduction); however, without that, similar code is generated to Alpha (the
> > > vectorizer decides the reduction is not worthwhile without SIMD support), and
> > > the test fails; hence, I've XFAILed for powerpc, but I think I could condition
> > > the XFAIL on powerpc64 && !check_p8vector_hw_available, if preferred?
> >
> > Fun.
> >
> > Does it work with -mcpu=power7?
> >
> > Bill: What GCC DejaGNU incantation would you like to see?
>
> This sounds like more fallout from unaligned accesses being faster on
> POWER8 than previous hardware.  What about conditioning the XFAIL on
>
> { powerpc*-*-* && { ! vect_hw_misalign } }
>
> -- does this work properly?  Right now that's just an alternative way of
> saying what you suggested

It works properly in that it is equivalent to what I suggested. However, the 
test passes on power7 as well, so my suggestion of check_p8vector_hw_available 
is itself wrong...

--Alan