Hello!
My recent patch [1] exposed problem with avx_h<plusminus_insn>v4df3
AVX pattern. The pattern is defined in a wrong way, since the
components of the result should not cross 128bit lane boundary. This
is the cause of failures is [2]:
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx-vhaddpd-256-1.c execution test
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx-vhsubpd-256-1.c execution test
2012-03-29 Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com>
* config/i386/sse.md (avx_h<plusminus_insn>v4df3): Fix results
crossing 128bit lane boundary.
Patch was bootstrapped and regression tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
AVX target. Patch was committed to mainline, will be committed to all
release branches.
BTW: It looks that the x86 testsuite is not effective enough, these
types of problems should be detected before new patterns are
introduced to the .md files.
[1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-03/msg01819.html
[2] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2012-03/msg03370.html
Uros.
Index: sse.md
===================================================================
--- sse.md (revision 185973)
+++ sse.md (working copy)
@@ -1175,15 +1175,15 @@
(parallel [(const_int 0)]))
(vec_select:DF (match_dup 1) (parallel [(const_int 1)])))
(plusminus:DF
- (vec_select:DF (match_dup 1) (parallel [(const_int 2)]))
- (vec_select:DF (match_dup 1) (parallel [(const_int 3)]))))
- (vec_concat:V2DF
- (plusminus:DF
(vec_select:DF
(match_operand:V4DF 2 "nonimmediate_operand" "xm")
(parallel [(const_int 0)]))
- (vec_select:DF (match_dup 2) (parallel [(const_int 1)])))
+ (vec_select:DF (match_dup 2) (parallel [(const_int 1)]))))
+ (vec_concat:V2DF
(plusminus:DF
+ (vec_select:DF (match_dup 1) (parallel [(const_int 2)]))
+ (vec_select:DF (match_dup 1) (parallel [(const_int 3)])))
+ (plusminus:DF
(vec_select:DF (match_dup 2) (parallel [(const_int 2)]))
(vec_select:DF (match_dup 2) (parallel [(const_int 3)]))))))]
"TARGET_AVX"
