This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [AArch64] Fix simd intrinsics bug on float vminnm/vmaxnm


On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 10:16:31AM +0100, Jiong Wang wrote:
> I was using dg-xfail-if, (the description is still using "marked as
> XFAIL"...),
> but later found it's actually broken under advsimd-intrinsics,
> UNRESOLVEDs are
> given at the same time instead of clean XFAIL, I suspect those dg-do-what
> overriding broken dejangu internal variable, Christophe, do you mind
> have a look?
> 
> Meanwhile, as the new vminnm and vmaxnm testcases are using the
> existed test
> infrastructure of vmin/vmax infrastructure which is based on
> binary-op-no64.inc
> where only float32 defined.  If we enable float64x2, there will be
> two issues:
> 
>   * The naming of binary-iop-no64.inc needs to be updated, but it's used by
>     several other files, so not sure it's the correct approach.
> 
>   * You will want to xfail only float64x2 testing on ARM inside vmin.c and
>     vmax.c, I don't know how to do that.
> 
> For the vminnm and vmaxnm testing, I really want to go ahead to
> implement them
> for ARM so we won't be bothered by xfail, there is backend pattern
> already which
> is fmin/fax, however they are standard name without "neon_" prefix,
> while unlike
> AArch64, ARM neon builtins infrastructure force the prefix to be
> "neon_".  The
> macro expand infrastructure needs to be updated.
> 
> For this patch, I am going to change dg-skip-if to dg-xfail-if, but
> please be
> prepare with those UNRESOLVED failures which will go away once
> advsimd-intrinsics.exp fixed.  Meanwhile I will create seperate test
> file for
> float64x2, and dg-skip them on ARM.

While we resolve how we're going to add the tests to the advsimd-intrinsics
suite, we should keep in mind that this fix needs to go to the release
branches too.

To make backporting easier, could you please write a very simple
standalone test that exposes this bug, and submit this patch with just
that simple test? I've already OKed the functional part of this patch, and
I'm happy to pre-approve a simple testcase.

With that committed to trunk, this needs to go to all active release
branches please.

We can then figure out how best to add support for these intrinsics to
the full testsuite on trunk, as I think the proposals here would not make
a good candidate for back-porting.

Thanks,
James
 


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]