> -----Original Message-----
> From: H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Friday, July 16, 2021 3:21 AM
> To: Tamar Christina <tamar.christ...@arm.com>
> Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Richard Sandiford
> <richard.sandif...@arm.com>; nd <n...@arm.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4][committed] testsuite: Fix testisms in scalar tests
> PR101457
>
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 9:40 AM Tamar Christina via Gcc-patches <gcc-
> patc...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > These testcases accidentally contain the wrong signs for the expected
> > values for the scalar code. The vector code however is correct.
> >
> > Bootstrapped Regtested on aarch64-none-linux-gnu and no issues.
> >
> > Committed as a trivial fix.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Tamar
> >
> > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
> >
> > PR middle-end/101457
> > * gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-17.c: Fix signs of scalar code.
> > * gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-18.c: Likewise.
> > * gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-22.c: Likewise.
> > * gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-9.c: Likewise.
> >
> > --- inline copy of patch --
> > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-17.c
> > b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-17.c
> > index
> >
> aa269c4d657f65e07e36df7f3fd0098cf3aaf4d0..38f86fe458adcc7ebbbae22f5cc
> 1
> > e720928f2d48 100644
> > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-17.c
> > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-17.c
> > @@ -35,8 +35,9 @@ main (void)
> > {
> > check_vect ();
> >
> > - SIGNEDNESS_3 char a[N], b[N];
> > - int expected = 0x12345;
> > + SIGNEDNESS_3 char a[N];
> > + SIGNEDNESS_4 char b[N];
> > + SIGNEDNESS_1 int expected = 0x12345;
> > for (int i = 0; i < N; ++i)
> > {
> > a[i] = BASE + i * 5;
> > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-18.c
> > b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-18.c
> > index
> >
> 2b1cc0411c3256ccd876d8b4da18ce4881dc0af9..2e86ebe3c6c6a0da9ac2428685
> 92
> > f30028ed2155 100644
> > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-18.c
> > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-18.c
> > @@ -35,8 +35,9 @@ main (void)
> > {
> > check_vect ();
> >
> > - SIGNEDNESS_3 char a[N], b[N];
> > - int expected = 0x12345;
> > + SIGNEDNESS_3 char a[N];
> > + SIGNEDNESS_4 char b[N];
> > + SIGNEDNESS_1 int expected = 0x12345;
> > for (int i = 0; i < N; ++i)
> > {
> > a[i] = BASE + i * 5;
> > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-22.c
> > b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-22.c
> > index
> >
> febeb19784c6aaca72dc0871af0d32cc91fa6ea2..0bde43a6cb855ce5edd9015eb
> f34
> > ca226353d77e 100644
> > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-22.c
> > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-22.c
> > @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ main (void)
> >
> > SIGNEDNESS_3 char a[N];
> > SIGNEDNESS_4 short b[N];
> > - int expected = 0x12345;
> > + SIGNEDNESS_1 long expected = 0x12345;
>
> Does it work with long == int? I still got
Ah no, It requires double widening. I'll replace it with a long long.
Thanks,
Tamar
>
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-22.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects scan-tree-dump-
> not vect "vect_recog_dot_prod_pattern: detected"
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-22.c scan-tree-dump-not vect
> "vect_recog_dot_prod_pattern: detected"
>
> with -m32 on Linux/x86-64.
>
> > for (int i = 0; i < N; ++i)
> > {
> > a[i] = BASE + i * 5;
> > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-9.c
> > b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-9.c
> > index
> >
> cbbeedec3bfd0810a8ce8036e6670585d9334924..d1049c96bf1febfc8933622e2
> 92b
> > 44cc8dd129cc 100644
> > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-9.c
> > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-9.c
> > @@ -35,8 +35,9 @@ main (void)
> > {
> > check_vect ();
> >
> > - SIGNEDNESS_3 char a[N], b[N];
> > - int expected = 0x12345;
> > + SIGNEDNESS_3 char a[N];
> > + SIGNEDNESS_4 char b[N];
> > + SIGNEDNESS_1 int expected = 0x12345;
> > for (int i = 0; i < N; ++i)
> > {
> > a[i] = BASE + i * 5;
> >
> >
> > --
>
>
> --
> H.J.
