Re: [PATCH] testsuite, arm: Fix up pr112337.c test
On 01/12/2023 13:45, Christophe Lyon wrote: > On Fri, 1 Dec 2023 at 13:44, Richard Earnshaw (lists) > wrote: >> >> On 01/12/2023 11:28, Saurabh Jha wrote: >>> Hey, >>> >>> I introduced this test "gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/mve/pr112337.c" in >>> this commit 2365aae84de030bbb006edac18c9314812fc657b before. This had an >>> error which I unfortunately missed. This patch fixes that test. >>> >>> Did regression testing on arm-none-eabi and found no regressions. Output of >>> running gcc/contrib/compare_tests is this: >>> >>> """ >>> Tests that now work, but didn't before (2 tests): >>> >>> arm-eabi-aem/-marm/-march=armv7-a/-mfpu=vfpv3-d16/-mfloat-abi=softfp: >>> gcc.target/arm/mve/pr112337.c (test for excess errors) >>> arm-eabi-aem/-mthumb/-march=armv8-a/-mfpu=crypto-neon-fp-armv8/-mfloat-abi=hard: >>> gcc.target/arm/mve/pr112337.c (test for excess errors) >>> """ >>> >>> Ok for trunk? I don't have commit access so could someone please commit on >>> my behalf? >>> >>> Regards, >>> Saurabh >>> >>> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: >>> >>> * gcc.target/arm/mve/pr112337.c: Fix the testcase >> >> >> Hmm, could this be related to the changes Christophe made recently to change >> the way MVE vector types were set up internally? If so, this might indicate >> an issue that's going to affect real users with existing code. >> > > My change was only about vector types, here the problem is with a > pointer to a scalar. > Anyway, I ran the test with my commit reverted and it still fails in > the same way, so I think this patch is needed. > > Thanks, > > Christophe > >> Christophe? >> >> R. Ok, thanks for checking. In that case, Saurabh, your patch is OK, but please change 'Fix testcase' to 'Use int32_t instead of int.' Note that ChangeLog entries end with a full stop. R.
Re: [PATCH] testsuite, arm: Fix up pr112337.c test
On Fri, 1 Dec 2023 at 13:44, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: > > On 01/12/2023 11:28, Saurabh Jha wrote: > > Hey, > > > > I introduced this test "gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/mve/pr112337.c" in > > this commit 2365aae84de030bbb006edac18c9314812fc657b before. This had an > > error which I unfortunately missed. This patch fixes that test. > > > > Did regression testing on arm-none-eabi and found no regressions. Output of > > running gcc/contrib/compare_tests is this: > > > > """ > > Tests that now work, but didn't before (2 tests): > > > > arm-eabi-aem/-marm/-march=armv7-a/-mfpu=vfpv3-d16/-mfloat-abi=softfp: > > gcc.target/arm/mve/pr112337.c (test for excess errors) > > arm-eabi-aem/-mthumb/-march=armv8-a/-mfpu=crypto-neon-fp-armv8/-mfloat-abi=hard: > > gcc.target/arm/mve/pr112337.c (test for excess errors) > > """ > > > > Ok for trunk? I don't have commit access so could someone please commit on > > my behalf? > > > > Regards, > > Saurabh > > > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > > > > * gcc.target/arm/mve/pr112337.c: Fix the testcase > > > Hmm, could this be related to the changes Christophe made recently to change > the way MVE vector types were set up internally? If so, this might indicate > an issue that's going to affect real users with existing code. > My change was only about vector types, here the problem is with a pointer to a scalar. Anyway, I ran the test with my commit reverted and it still fails in the same way, so I think this patch is needed. Thanks, Christophe > Christophe? > > R.
Re: [PATCH] testsuite, arm: Fix up pr112337.c test
On 01/12/2023 11:28, Saurabh Jha wrote: > Hey, > > I introduced this test "gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/mve/pr112337.c" in this > commit 2365aae84de030bbb006edac18c9314812fc657b before. This had an error > which I unfortunately missed. This patch fixes that test. > > Did regression testing on arm-none-eabi and found no regressions. Output of > running gcc/contrib/compare_tests is this: > > """ > Tests that now work, but didn't before (2 tests): > > arm-eabi-aem/-marm/-march=armv7-a/-mfpu=vfpv3-d16/-mfloat-abi=softfp: > gcc.target/arm/mve/pr112337.c (test for excess errors) > arm-eabi-aem/-mthumb/-march=armv8-a/-mfpu=crypto-neon-fp-armv8/-mfloat-abi=hard: > gcc.target/arm/mve/pr112337.c (test for excess errors) > """ > > Ok for trunk? I don't have commit access so could someone please commit on my > behalf? > > Regards, > Saurabh > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > > * gcc.target/arm/mve/pr112337.c: Fix the testcase Hmm, could this be related to the changes Christophe made recently to change the way MVE vector types were set up internally? If so, this might indicate an issue that's going to affect real users with existing code. Christophe? R.
[PATCH] testsuite, arm: Fix up pr112337.c test
Hey,
I introduced this test "gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/mve/pr112337.c" in this
commit 2365aae84de030bbb006edac18c9314812fc657b before. This had an error which I
unfortunately missed. This patch fixes that test.
Did regression testing on arm-none-eabi and found no regressions. Output of
running gcc/contrib/compare_tests is this:
"""
Tests that now work, but didn't before (2 tests):
arm-eabi-aem/-marm/-march=armv7-a/-mfpu=vfpv3-d16/-mfloat-abi=softfp:
gcc.target/arm/mve/pr112337.c (test for excess errors)
arm-eabi-aem/-mthumb/-march=armv8-a/-mfpu=crypto-neon-fp-armv8/-mfloat-abi=hard:
gcc.target/arm/mve/pr112337.c (test for excess errors)
"""
Ok for trunk? I don't have commit access so could someone please commit on my
behalf?
Regards,
Saurabh
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* gcc.target/arm/mve/pr112337.c: Fix the testcase
From 2365aae84de030bbb006edac18c9314812fc657b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Saurabh Jha
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2023 13:05:58 +
Subject: [PATCH] testsuite: Fix up pr112337.c test
---
gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/mve/pr112337.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/mve/pr112337.c
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/mve/pr112337.c
index 8f491990088..d1a075ecd0e 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/mve/pr112337.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/mve/pr112337.c
@@ -5,8 +5,8 @@
#include
void g(int32x4_t);
-void f(int, int, int, short, int *p) {
- int *bias = p;
+void f(int, int, int, short, int32_t *p) {
+ int32_t *bias = p;
for (;;) {
int32x4_t d = vldrwq_s32 (p);
bias += 4;
--
2.34.1
