Re: [PATCH] Adjust builtin-bswap-6/7

2014-04-08 Thread Richard Biener
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 6:22 PM, Andreas Krebbel kreb...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 04:19:06PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: The adjusted testcases now fail on x86_64/i?86 at least. See PR60776. They seem to require at least -O2 on x86 with that change. Ok to apply? Hmm,

Re: [PATCH] Adjust builtin-bswap-6/7

2014-04-08 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 06:22:14PM +0200, Andreas Krebbel wrote: On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 04:19:06PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: The adjusted testcases now fail on x86_64/i?86 at least. See PR60776. They seem to require at least -O2 on x86 with that change. Ok to apply? The reason why the

Re: [PATCH] Adjust builtin-bswap-6/7

2014-04-08 Thread Richard Biener
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 06:22:14PM +0200, Andreas Krebbel wrote: On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 04:19:06PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: The adjusted testcases now fail on x86_64/i?86 at least. See PR60776. They seem to require

Re: [PATCH] Adjust builtin-bswap-6/7

2014-04-08 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 10:26:30AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 6:22 PM, Andreas Krebbel kreb...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 04:19:06PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: The adjusted testcases now fail on x86_64/i?86 at least. See PR60776. They

Re: [PATCH] Adjust builtin-bswap-6/7

2014-04-08 Thread Andreas Krebbel
On 04/08/2014 10:41 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 10:26:30AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 6:22 PM, Andreas Krebbel kreb...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 04:19:06PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: The adjusted testcases now fail on

Re: [PATCH] Adjust builtin-bswap-6/7

2014-04-08 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 10:53:19AM +0200, Andreas Krebbel wrote: On 04/08/2014 10:41 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 10:26:30AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 6:22 PM, Andreas Krebbel kreb...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at

Re: [PATCH] Adjust builtin-bswap-6/7

2014-04-08 Thread Andreas Krebbel
On 04/08/2014 11:12 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 10:53:19AM +0200, Andreas Krebbel wrote: On 04/08/2014 10:41 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 10:26:30AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 6:22 PM, Andreas Krebbel kreb...@linux.vnet.ibm.com

Re: [PATCH] Adjust builtin-bswap-6/7

2014-04-08 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 11:21:56AM +0200, Andreas Krebbel wrote: On 04/08/2014 11:12 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 10:53:19AM +0200, Andreas Krebbel wrote: On 04/08/2014 10:41 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 10:26:30AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: On

Re: [PATCH] Adjust builtin-bswap-6/7

2014-04-08 Thread Andreas Krebbel
Hi, what about that one? Tested on x86_64, s390, and s390x. Bye, -Andreas- 2014-04-08 Andreas Krebbel andreas.kreb...@de.ibm.com * gcc.dg/builtin-bswap-6.c: Use -mbranch-cost=0 for s390. * gcc.dg/builtin-bswap-7.c: Likewise. Revert 2014-04-04 Andreas

Re: [PATCH] Adjust builtin-bswap-6/7

2014-04-08 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 12:41:41PM +0200, Andreas Krebbel wrote: what about that one? Tested on x86_64, s390, and s390x. LGTM, thanks. 2014-04-08 Andreas Krebbel andreas.kreb...@de.ibm.com * gcc.dg/builtin-bswap-6.c: Use -mbranch-cost=0 for s390. *

Re: [PATCH] Adjust builtin-bswap-6/7

2014-04-08 Thread Andreas Krebbel
On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 12:41:02PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: Thus, please commit any of these variants, if you go for /* { dg-additional-options -mbranch-cost=0 { target s390*-*-* } } */ plus reverting your earlier changes, you can also consider addition of two new tests that would contain

Re: [PATCH] Adjust builtin-bswap-6/7

2014-04-07 Thread Richard Biener
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 7:51 PM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote: On 04/04/14 10:18, Andreas Krebbel wrote: Hi, the attached patch modifies the builtin-bswap-6/7 testcases in order to prevent GCC from using math instead of a compare. Only with a compare the folding in combine actually takes

Re: [PATCH] Adjust builtin-bswap-6/7

2014-04-07 Thread Andreas Krebbel
On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 04:19:06PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: The adjusted testcases now fail on x86_64/i?86 at least. See PR60776. They seem to require at least -O2 on x86 with that change. Ok to apply? diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/builtin-bswap-6.c

[PATCH] Adjust builtin-bswap-6/7

2014-04-04 Thread Andreas Krebbel
Hi, the attached patch modifies the builtin-bswap-6/7 testcases in order to prevent GCC from using math instead of a compare. Only with a compare the folding in combine actually takes place. Whether the return value is produce with a compare or not depends again on the value of branch cost.

Re: [PATCH] Adjust builtin-bswap-6/7

2014-04-04 Thread Jeff Law
On 04/04/14 10:18, Andreas Krebbel wrote: Hi, the attached patch modifies the builtin-bswap-6/7 testcases in order to prevent GCC from using math instead of a compare. Only with a compare the folding in combine actually takes place. Whether the return value is produce with a compare or not