This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH][GCC][testsuite][mid-end][ARM][AARCH64] Fix failing vec align tests.
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 10:37:39AM +0100, Tamar Christina wrote:
> Ping
OK for backport, but I'm not sure why you want to backport a patch which
you know is going to break something.
When you commit, just roll everything up in to one patch, rather than three
patches, two of which cause breaks.
Reviewed-by: James Greenhalgh <james.greenhalgh@arm.com>
Thanks,
James
> ________________________________________
> From: Tamar Christina
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 11:17 AM
> To: Christophe Lyon
> Cc: Rainer Orth; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; nd; James Greenhalgh; Richard Earnshaw; Marcus Shawcroft
> Subject: Re: [PATCH][GCC][testsuite][mid-end][ARM][AARCH64] Fix failing vec align tests.
>
> Hi All,
>
> I've submitted a patch to fix this https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-10/msg00971.html
>
> Permission (just as the new patch) to backport these test changes to
> GCC 7 to fix the regressions there?
>
> Thanks,
> Tamar.
> ________________________________________
> From: Christophe Lyon <christophe.lyon@linaro.org>
> Sent: Friday, October 6, 2017 5:07:44 PM
> To: Tamar Christina
> Cc: Rainer Orth; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; nd; James Greenhalgh; Richard Earnshaw; Marcus Shawcroft
> Subject: Re: [PATCH][GCC][testsuite][mid-end][ARM][AARCH64] Fix failing vec align tests.
>
> On 6 October 2017 at 09:45, Tamar Christina <Tamar.Christina@arm.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Rainer Orth [mailto:ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE]
> >> Sent: 05 October 2017 20:16
> >> To: Tamar Christina
> >> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; nd; James Greenhalgh; Richard Earnshaw;
> >> Marcus Shawcroft
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH][GCC][testsuite][mid-end][ARM][AARCH64] Fix failing
> >> vec align tests.
> >>
> >> Hi Tamar,
> >>
> >> > Previously I had corrected the vect_hw_misalign check which prompted
> >> > these three test to start failing because the condition needs to be
> >> > inverted in the testcases.
> >> >
> >> > Regtested on aarch64-none-elf, arm-none-linux-gnueabihf and x86_64-pc-
> >> linux-gnu.
> >> >
> >> > Ok for trunk?
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > Tamar.
> >> >
> >> > gcc/testsuite/
> >> > 2017-10-02 Tamar Christina <tamar.christina@arm.com>
> >> >
> >> > * gcc.dg/vect/vect-align-1.c: Fix vect_hw_misalign condition.
> >> > * gcc.dg/vect/vect-align-2.c: Likewise.
> >> > * gcc.dg/vect/vect-multitypes-1.c: Likewise.
> >>
> >> unfortunately, your patch caused gcc.dg/vect/vect-multitypes-1.c to FAIL on
> >> sparc-sun-solaris2.11 (32 and 64-bit):
> >>
> >> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-multitypes-1.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects scan-tree-dump-
> >> times vect "Vectorizing an unaligned access" 4
> >> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-multitypes-1.c scan-tree-dump-times vect
> >> "Vectorizing an unaligned access" 4
> >
> > Thanks! I'll take a look.
> >
>
> If that's easier for you, I've noticed the same thing on
> armeb-none-linux-gnueabihf
> --with-mode arm
> --with-cpu cortex-a9
> --with-fpu neon-fp16
>
> Christophe
>
>
> > Tamar
> >
> >>
> >> It had XFAILed before.
> >>
> >> Rainer
> >>
> >> --
> >> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University