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]

[PATCH][ARM] Fix test armv8_2-fp16-move-1.c


Hi

This patch fixes the test case armv8_2-fp16-move-1.c for arm-none-linux-gnueabihf where 2 of the scan-assembler directives were failing. We now generate less vmov between core and VFP registers. Thus changing those directives to reflect that.

Is this ok for trunk?
If yes could someone commit it on my behalf?

Sudi


*** gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog ***

2017-11-16  Sudakshina Das  <sudi.das@arm.com>

	* gcc.target/arm/armv8_2-fp16-move-1.c: Edit vmov scan-assembler
	directives.

diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/armv8_2-fp16-move-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/armv8_2-fp16-move-1.c
index bb4e68f..0ed8560 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/armv8_2-fp16-move-1.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/armv8_2-fp16-move-1.c
@@ -101,8 +101,8 @@ test_select_8 (__fp16 a, __fp16 b, __fp16 c)
 /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {vselgt\.f16\ts[0-9]+, s[0-9]+, s[0-9]+} 1 } }  */
 /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {vselge\.f16\ts[0-9]+, s[0-9]+, s[0-9]+} 1 } }  */
 
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {vmov\.f16\ts[0-9]+, r[0-9]+} 4 } }  */
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {vmov\.f16\tr[0-9]+, s[0-9]+} 4 } }  */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {vmov\.f16\ts[0-9]+, r[0-9]+} 2 } }  */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {vmov\ts[0-9]+, s[0-9]+} 4 } }  */
 
 int
 test_compare_1 (__fp16 a, __fp16 b)

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