On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 02:17:59PM +0000, Richard Sandiford wrote: > Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> writes: > > On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 02:51:09PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > >> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Richard Sandiford > >> <richard.sandif...@linaro.org> wrote: > >> > r254589 was supposed to leave tests unchanged for the default setting > >> > of VECTOR_BITS, but I must have got my sums wrong on pr81136.c. > >> > Sorry for the breakage. > >> > > >> > Tested on aarch64-linux-gnu, x86_64-linux-gnu and powerpc64le-linux-gnu, > >> > OK to install? > >> > >> Ok. > > > > That will still FAIL e.g. with -march=skylake-avx512 or -march=knl > > (at least when not preferring 256 or 128 bit vectors), those would need > > ALIGNMENT 64. > > Yeah, the real fix for AVX512 is to define VECTOR_BITS. And I'd have > thought even AVX2 would need to define it to get clean results on other > tests. But the patch that introduced VECTOR_BITS just wasn't supposed > to be changing the default behaviour in the way that I'd accidentally > done here. > > Do you know what the vect.exp results are like for 256-bit and 512-bit > vectors on x86_64? Like I said in the PR, I was surprised we were the
Dunno, but can try it for -march=haswell easily (or we could look up gcc-testresults). I think some of the Intel folks are surely testing regularly with --with-arch=haswell configured compiler, judging from many bugreports about tests from the testsuite that only fail with -march=haswell. Jakub