On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 11:10:12PM +0000, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/mve/pr114801.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
> +/* { dg-do compile } */
> +/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_v8_1m_mve_ok } */
> +/* { dg-add-options arm_v8_1m_mve } */
> +/* { dg-final { check-function-bodies "**" "" "" } } */
> +
> +#include <arm_mve.h>
> +
> +/*
> +** test_32:
> +**...
> +** mov r[0-9]+, #65535 @ movhi
> +**...
> +*/
> +uint32x4_t test_32() {
> + return vdupq_m_n_u32(vdupq_n_u32(0), 0, 0xcccc);
Just a testcase nit. I think testing 0xcccc isn't that useful,
it tests the same 4 bits 4 times.
Might be more interesting to test 4 different 4 bit elements,
one of them 0 (to verify it doesn't turn that into all ones),
one all 1s (that is the other valid case) and then 2 random
other values in between.
> +}
> +
> +/*
> +** test_16:
> +**...
> +** mov r[0-9]+, #52428 @ movhi
> +**...
> +*/
> +uint16x8_t test_16() {
> + return vdupq_m_n_u16(vdupq_n_u16(0), 0, 0xcccc);
And for these it can actually test all 4 possible 2 bit elements,
so say 0x3021
> +}
> +
> +/*
> +** test_8:
> +**...
> +** mov r[0-9]+, #52428 @ movhi
> +**...
> +*/
> +uint8x16_t test_8() {
> + return vdupq_m_n_u8(vdupq_n_u8(0), 0, 0xcccc);
and here use some random pattern.
BTW, the patch is ok for 14.1 if it is approved and committed today
(so that it can be cherry-picked tomorrow morning at latest to the branch).
Jakub
