[AArch64][ARM][GCC][PATCHv2 3/3] Add tests for missing Poly64_t intrinsics to GCC

[Tamar Christina]

 >
> > A few comments about this new version:
> > * arm-neon-ref.h: why do you create
> CHECK_RESULTS_NAMED_NO_FP16_NO_POLY64?
> > Can't you just add calls to CHECK_CRYPTO in the existing
> > CHECK_RESULTS_NAMED_NO_FP16?

Yes, that should be fine, I didn't used to have CHECK_CRYPTO before and when I added it
I didn't remove the split. I'll do it now.

> >
> > * p64_p128:
> > From what I can see ARM and AArch64 differ on the vceq variants
> > available with poly64.
> > For ARM, arm_neon.h contains: uint64x1_t vceq_p64 (poly64x1_t __a,
> > poly64x1_t __b) For AArch64, I can't see vceq_p64 in arm_neon.h? ...
> > Actually I've just noticed the other you submitted while I was writing
> > this, where you add vceq_p64 for aarch64, but it still returns
> > uint64_t.
> > Why do you change the vceq_64 test to return poly64_t instead of
> uint64_t?

This patch is slightly outdated. The correct type is `uint64_t` but when it was noticed
This patch was already sent. New one coming soon.

> >
> > Why do you add #ifdef __aarch64 before vldX_p64 tests and until vsli_p64?
> >

This is wrong, remove them. It was supposed to be around the vldX_lane_p64 tests.

> > The comment /* vget_lane_p64 tests.  */ is wrong before VLDX_LANE
> > tests
> >
> > You need to protect the new vmov, vget_high and vget_lane tests with
> > #ifdef __aarch64__.
> >

vget_lane is already in an #ifdef, vmov you're right, but I also notice that the
test calls VDUP instead of VMOV, which explains why I didn't get a test failure.

Thanks for the feedback,
I'll get these updated.

> 
> Actually, vget_high_p64 exists on arm, so no need for the #fidef for it.
> 
> 
> > Christophe
> >
> >> Kind regards,
> >> Tamar
> >> ________________________________________
> >> From: Tamar Christina
> >> Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2016 11:58:46 AM
> >> To: Christophe Lyon
> >> Cc: GCC Patches; christophe.lyon@st.com; Marcus Shawcroft; Richard
> >> Earnshaw; James Greenhalgh; Kyrylo Tkachov; nd
> >> Subject: RE: [AArch64][ARM][GCC][PATCHv2 3/3] Add tests for missing
> >> Poly64_t intrinsics to GCC
> >>
> >> Hi Christophe,
> >>
> >> Thanks for the review!
> >>
> >>>
> >>> A while ago I added p64_p128.c, to contain all the poly64/128 tests
> >>> except for vreinterpret.
> >>> Why do you need to create p64.c ?
> >>
> >> I originally created it because I had a much smaller set of
> >> intrinsics that I wanted to add initially, this grew and It hadn't occurred to
> me that I can use the existing file now.
> >>
> >> Another reason was the effective-target arm_crypto_ok as you
> mentioned below.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Similarly, adding tests for vcreate_p64 etc... in p64.c or
> >>> p64_p128.c might be easier to maintain than adding them to vcreate.c
> >>> etc with several #ifdef conditions.
> >>
> >> Fair enough, I'll move them to p64_p128.c.
> >>
> >>> For vdup-vmod.c, why do you add the "&& defined(__aarch64__)"
> >>> condition? These intrinsics are defined in arm/arm_neon.h, right?
> >>> They are tested in p64_p128.c
> >>
> >> I should have looked for them, they weren't being tested before so I
> >> had Mistakenly assumed that they weren't available. Now I realize I
> >> just need To add the proper test option to the file to enable crypto. I'll
> update this as well.
> >>
> >>> Looking at your patch, it seems some tests are currently missing for arm:
> >>> vget_high_p64. I'm not sure why I missed it when I removed neont-
> >>> testgen...
> >>
> >> I'll adjust the test conditions so they run for ARM as well.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Regarding vreinterpret_p128.c, doesn't the existing effective-target
> >>> arm_crypto_ok prevent the tests from running on aarch64?
> >>
> >> Yes they do, I was comparing the output against a clean version and
> >> hasn't noticed That they weren't running. Thanks!
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>
> >>> Christophe