[GCC][PATCH][AArch64] ACLE intrinsics for BFCVTN, BFCVTN2 (AArch64 AdvSIMD) and BFCVT (AArch64 FP)

[Richard Sandiford]

Tamar Christina <Tamar.Christina@arm.com> writes:
> Hi Richard,
>
>> 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ffb5305e2e5ea1aadae07e82f
>> d8e
>> > d6f9f247c1a9
>> > --- /dev/null
>> > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/bfcvt-compil
>> > +++ e.c
>> > @@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
>> > +/* { dg-do assemble { target { aarch64*-*-* } } } */
>> 
>> The { target ... } isn't necessary here.  (Missed that in the other review, sorry.)
>> 
>
> Why not? The advsimd-intrinsics tests are shared between both AArch32 and AArch64.

Ah, so they are.  Think it would better to move them to a new
gcc.target/arm-common or something in that case.  Tests in
gcc.target/aarch64 really ought to be specific to aarch64.

Thanks,
Richard

>
> Tamar.
>
>> > +/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_v8_2a_bf16_neon_ok } */
>> > +/* { dg-add-options arm_v8_2a_bf16_neon } */
>> > +/* { dg-additional-options "-save-temps" } */
>> > +/* { dg-final { check-function-bodies "**" "" {-O[^0]} } } */
>> > +/* { dg-skip-if "" { *-*-* } { "-fno-fat-lto-objects" } } */
>> > +
>> > +#include <arm_neon.h>
>> > +
>> > +/*
>> > +**test_bfcvtn:
>> > +**     bfcvtn\tv0.4h, v0.4s
>> 
>> Like with the other review, I think the literal tab you had in the original patch
>> looks better than \t.
>> 
>> > [...]
>> > diff --git
>> > a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/bfcvt-nosimd.c
>> > b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/bfcvt-nosimd.c
>> > new file mode 100644
>> > index
>> >
>> 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..8d7dffe16275de60e884c449af
>> a0
>> > fea0b1af6081
>> > --- /dev/null
>> > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/bfcvt-nosimd
>> > +++ .c
>> > @@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
>> > +/* { dg-do assemble { target { aarch64*-*-* } } } */
>> 
>> This needs:
>> 
>> /* { dg-require-effective-target aarch64_asm_bf16_ok } */
>> 
>> (Doesn't exist yet, but I hope to post a patch soon.)
>> 
>> Looks good otherwise, thanks.
>> 
>> Richard