Re: [Patch] Increase array sizes in vect-tests to enable 256-bit vectorization

[Richard Guenther <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>]

On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 5:54 PM, Michael Zolotukhin
<michael.v.zolotukhin@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I mean, that, when 256-bit vectorization is enabled we still use 128bit
>> vectorization if the arrays are too short for 256bit vectorization. ?You'll
>> lose this test coverage when you change the array sizes.
> That's true, but do we need all these test both with short and long
> arrays? We could have the tests with increased sizes and compile them
> with/without use of avx, thus testing both 256- and 128- bit
> vectorization. Additionally, we might want to add several tests with
> short arrays to check what happens if 256-bit is available, but arrays
> is too short for it. I mean we don't need to duplicate all of the
> tests to check this situation.

Well, initially those tests served as a way to prove that dual-size
vectorization
works.  You should not remove this testing functionality.

Richard.

> On 3 December 2011 18:31, Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 6:39 PM, Michael Zolotukhin
>> <michael.v.zolotukhin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Shouldn't we add a variant for each testcase so that we still
>>>> excercise both 128-bit and 256-bit vectorization paths?
>>>
>>> These tests are still good to test 128-bit vectorization, the changes
>>> was made just to make sure that 256-bit vectorization is possible on
>>> the tests.
>>>
>>> Actually, It's just first step in enabling these tests for 256 bits -
>>> for now many of them are failing if '-mavx' or '-mavx2' is specified
>>> (mostly due to different diagnostics messages produced by vectorizer),
>>> but with original (small) sizes of arrays we couldn't even check that.
>>> When they are enabled, it'll be possible to use them for testing both
>>> 128- and 256- bit vectorization.
>>
>> I mean, that, when 256-bit vectorization is enabled we still use 128bit
>> vectorization if the arrays are too short for 256bit vectorization. ?You'll
>> lose this test coverage when you change the array sizes.
>>
>> Richard.
>>
>>> Michael
>>>
>>>
>>> 2011/12/2 Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>>>> 2011/12/2 Michael Zolotukhin <michael.v.zolotukhin@gmail.com>:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> This patch increases array sizes in tests from vect.exp suite, thus
>>>>> enabling 256-bit vectorization where it's available.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok for trunk?
>>>>
>>>> Shouldn't we add a variant for each testcase so that we still
>>>> excercise both 128-bit and 256-bit vectorization paths?
>>>>
>>>>> Changelog:
>>>>> 2011-12-02 ?Michael Zolotukhin ?<michael.v.zolotukhin@intel.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/slp-13.c: Increase array size, add initialization.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/slp-24.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/slp-3.c: Likewise and fix scans.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/slp-34.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/slp-4.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/slp-cond-2.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/slp-multitypes-11.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-1.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-10.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-105.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-112.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-15.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-2.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-31.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-32.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-33.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-34.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-35.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-36.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-6.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-73.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-74.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-75.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-76.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-80.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-85.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-89.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-97.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-98.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-all.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-double-reduc-6.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-iv-8.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-iv-8a.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-outer-1.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-outer-1a.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-outer-1b.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-outer-2.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-outer-2a.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-outer-2c.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-outer-3.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-outer-3a.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-outer-4a.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-outer-4b.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-outer-4c.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-outer-4d.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-outer-4m.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-outer-fir-lb.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-outer-fir.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-over-widen-1.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-over-widen-2.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-over-widen-3.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-over-widen-4.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-1char.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-2char.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-pattern-1b.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-pattern-1c.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-pattern-2b.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-shift-2.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-strided-a-u8-i8-gap2.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-strided-a-u8-i8-gap7.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-strided-u8-i8-gap2.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-strided-u8-i8-gap4.c: Ditto.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/vect/vect-strided-u8-i8-gap7.c: Ditto.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> ---
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> Michael V. Zolotukhin,
>>>>> Software Engineer
>>>>> Intel Corporation.
>
>
>
> --
> ---
> Best regards,
> Michael V. Zolotukhin,
> Software Engineer
> Intel Corporation.