This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH v2] MIPS: MIPS32r2 FP MADD instruction set support
- From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Richard Sandiford <rdsandiford at googlemail dot com>
- Cc: Steve Ellcey <Steve dot Ellcey at imgtec dot com>, "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 00:09:43 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] MIPS: MIPS32r2 FP MADD instruction set support
- References: <alpine dot DEB dot 1 dot 10 dot 1302200035560 dot 6762 at tp dot orcam dot me dot uk> <871ucavy5x dot fsf at talisman dot default> <alpine dot DEB dot 1 dot 10 dot 1302211602400 dot 6762 at tp dot orcam dot me dot uk> <1C0E790D7E4C75418622FD04CC2A1172015D6DAF at bamail02 dot ba dot imgtec dot org> <87obf5eedo dot fsf at talisman dot default> <alpine dot DEB dot 1 dot 10 dot 1302271951120 dot 6762 at tp dot orcam dot me dot uk> <alpine dot DEB dot 1 dot 10 dot 1307160205590 dot 20590 at tp dot orcam dot me dot uk> <87vc4axrr5 dot fsf at talisman dot default> <alpine dot DEB dot 1 dot 10 dot 1307162025230 dot 20590 at tp dot orcam dot me dot uk> <87ip0axoc5 dot fsf at talisman dot default>
On Tue, 16 Jul 2013, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> > I only checked executables, these tests do not produce any. I didn't
> > think of checking tests that do not produce executables, because they do
> > not check run-time validity of code produced. These three tests you've
> > referred to all pass with or without the change, but they are tangential
> > to it because they all force -mips4.
>
> OK, as long as those tests pass then the patch is OK, thanks. They aren't
> tangential for a -march=vr5400 run though. The tests force isa=4 rather
> than -mips4, and since the VR5432 is a MIPS IV processor, the tests will
> be run with that -march value. E.g.
>
> make check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board unix/-march=vr5400 mips.exp=nmadd*"
>
> fails for me but:
>
> make check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board unix/-march=vr5400/-mmad mips.exp=nmadd*"
>
> passes.
Thanks for correcting me on how isa=4 works in these tests. Doesn't that
mean they don't really provide correct coverage then? I mean they should
really pass on whetever targets support these instructions and shouldn't
fail on targets that do not, either by being skipped or better yet by
verifying that these instructions are not accidentally produced, shouldn't
they?
I have applied this change now, thanks for your review.
Maciej