| Message ID | 5A5783CC.6090806@foss.arm.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [arm] XFAIL advsimd-intrinsics/vld1x2.c | expand |
On 11 January 2018 at 16:33, Kyrill Tkachov <kyrylo.tkachov@foss.arm.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > This recently added test fails on arm. We haven't implemented these > intrinsics for arm > (any volunteers?) so for now let's XFAIL these on that target. > Also, the float64 versions of these intrinsics are not supposed to be > available on arm > so this patch slightly adjusts the test to not include them for aarch32. > In any case the entire test is XFAILed on arm, so this doesn't have any > noticeable > effect. > > The same number of tests (PASS) still occur on aarch64 but now they appear > as XFAIL > rather than FAIL on arm. > > Ok for trunk? (from an aarch64 perspective). > I think Kugan was planning to skip them on arm instead? > Thanks, > Kyrill > > 2018-01-11 Kyrylo Tkachov <kyrylo.tkachov@arm.com> > > * gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/vld1x2.c: Make float64 > tests specific to aarch64. XFAIL test on arm.
Hi Christophe, On 11/01/18 16:21, Christophe Lyon wrote: > On 11 January 2018 at 16:33, Kyrill Tkachov > <kyrylo.tkachov@foss.arm.com> wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> This recently added test fails on arm. We haven't implemented these >> intrinsics for arm >> (any volunteers?) so for now let's XFAIL these on that target. >> Also, the float64 versions of these intrinsics are not supposed to be >> available on arm >> so this patch slightly adjusts the test to not include them for aarch32. >> In any case the entire test is XFAILed on arm, so this doesn't have any >> noticeable >> effect. >> >> The same number of tests (PASS) still occur on aarch64 but now they appear >> as XFAIL >> rather than FAIL on arm. >> >> Ok for trunk? (from an aarch64 perspective). >> > I think Kugan was planning to skip them on arm instead? These intrinsics are specified to exist on arm as well: (search on https://developer.arm.com/technologies/neon/intrinsics) except the float64 ones, so from a purist perspective the tests should be passing on arm, but we know the reason why they're not (they are not implemented there), which is the rationale for XFAIL. Does XFAILing them interact badly with any bookkeeping that your testing system does? Thanks, Kyrill > >> Thanks, >> Kyrill >> >> 2018-01-11 Kyrylo Tkachov <kyrylo.tkachov@arm.com> >> >> * gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/vld1x2.c: Make float64 >> tests specific to aarch64. XFAIL test on arm.
On 11 January 2018 at 17:29, Kyrill Tkachov <kyrylo.tkachov@foss.arm.com> wrote: > Hi Christophe, > > On 11/01/18 16:21, Christophe Lyon wrote: >> >> On 11 January 2018 at 16:33, Kyrill Tkachov >> <kyrylo.tkachov@foss.arm.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> This recently added test fails on arm. We haven't implemented these >>> intrinsics for arm >>> (any volunteers?) so for now let's XFAIL these on that target. >>> Also, the float64 versions of these intrinsics are not supposed to be >>> available on arm >>> so this patch slightly adjusts the test to not include them for aarch32. >>> In any case the entire test is XFAILed on arm, so this doesn't have any >>> noticeable >>> effect. >>> >>> The same number of tests (PASS) still occur on aarch64 but now they >>> appear >>> as XFAIL >>> rather than FAIL on arm. >>> >>> Ok for trunk? (from an aarch64 perspective). >>> >> I think Kugan was planning to skip them on arm instead? > > > These intrinsics are specified to exist on arm as well: > (search on https://developer.arm.com/technologies/neon/intrinsics) > except the float64 ones, so from a purist perspective the tests > should be passing on arm, but we know the reason why they're not > (they are not implemented there), which is the rationale for XFAIL. > Does XFAILing them interact badly with any bookkeeping that your > testing system does? > No problem at all, I mainly cc'ed Kugan to make sure he is aware of your patch. > Thanks, > Kyrill > > >> >>> Thanks, >>> Kyrill >>> >>> 2018-01-11 Kyrylo Tkachov <kyrylo.tkachov@arm.com> >>> >>> * gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/vld1x2.c: Make float64 >>> tests specific to aarch64. XFAIL test on arm. > >
Hi Kyrill, Sorry for the breakage and thanks for fixing the testcase. Thanks, Kugan On 12 January 2018 at 02:33, Kyrill Tkachov <kyrylo.tkachov@foss.arm.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > This recently added test fails on arm. We haven't implemented these > intrinsics for arm > (any volunteers?) so for now let's XFAIL these on that target. > Also, the float64 versions of these intrinsics are not supposed to be > available on arm > so this patch slightly adjusts the test to not include them for aarch32. > In any case the entire test is XFAILed on arm, so this doesn't have any > noticeable > effect. > > The same number of tests (PASS) still occur on aarch64 but now they appear > as XFAIL > rather than FAIL on arm. > > Ok for trunk? (from an aarch64 perspective). > > Thanks, > Kyrill > > 2018-01-11 Kyrylo Tkachov <kyrylo.tkachov@arm.com> > > * gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/vld1x2.c: Make float64 > tests specific to aarch64. XFAIL test on arm. >
Ping. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-01/msg00913.html Thanks, Kyrill On 11/01/18 15:33, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > Hi all, > > This recently added test fails on arm. We haven't implemented these intrinsics for arm > (any volunteers?) so for now let's XFAIL these on that target. > Also, the float64 versions of these intrinsics are not supposed to be available on arm > so this patch slightly adjusts the test to not include them for aarch32. > In any case the entire test is XFAILed on arm, so this doesn't have any noticeable > effect. > > The same number of tests (PASS) still occur on aarch64 but now they appear as XFAIL > rather than FAIL on arm. > > Ok for trunk? (from an aarch64 perspective). > > Thanks, > Kyrill > > 2018-01-11 Kyrylo Tkachov <kyrylo.tkachov@arm.com> > > * gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/vld1x2.c: Make float64 > tests specific to aarch64. XFAIL test on arm.
Hi all, I'm committing this to trunk after a discussion with James. There's really not that much aarch64-specific change, it can be considered obvious from that perspective. Thanks, Kyrill On 19/01/18 10:58, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > Ping. > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-01/msg00913.html > > Thanks, > Kyrill > > On 11/01/18 15:33, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> This recently added test fails on arm. We haven't implemented these intrinsics for arm >> (any volunteers?) so for now let's XFAIL these on that target. >> Also, the float64 versions of these intrinsics are not supposed to be available on arm >> so this patch slightly adjusts the test to not include them for aarch32. >> In any case the entire test is XFAILed on arm, so this doesn't have any noticeable >> effect. >> >> The same number of tests (PASS) still occur on aarch64 but now they appear as XFAIL >> rather than FAIL on arm. >> >> Ok for trunk? (from an aarch64 perspective). >> >> Thanks, >> Kyrill >> >> 2018-01-11 Kyrylo Tkachov <kyrylo.tkachov@arm.com> >> >> * gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/vld1x2.c: Make float64 >> tests specific to aarch64. XFAIL test on arm. >
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/vld1x2.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/vld1x2.c index 0a43d0daf8c39949d447d29d7a5fa37a60b97134..92a139bc52313ef52d8bd97c6eb64dd8a7f7769a 100644 --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/vld1x2.c +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/vld1x2.c @@ -1,3 +1,5 @@ +/* We haven't implemented these intrinsics for arm yet. */ +/* { dg-xfail-if "" { arm*-*-* } } */ /* { dg-do run } */ /* { dg-options "-O3" } */ @@ -26,7 +28,7 @@ test_vld##SUFFIX##_x2 () \ return 0; \ } -#define VARIANTS(VARIANT) \ +#define VARIANTS_1(VARIANT) \ VARIANT (uint8, 8, _u8) \ VARIANT (uint16, 4, _u16) \ VARIANT (uint32, 2, _u32) \ @@ -39,7 +41,6 @@ VARIANT (poly8, 8, _p8) \ VARIANT (poly16, 4, _p16) \ VARIANT (float16, 4, _f16) \ VARIANT (float32, 2, _f32) \ -VARIANT (float64, 1, _f64) \ VARIANT (uint8, 16, q_u8) \ VARIANT (uint16, 8, q_u16) \ VARIANT (uint32, 4, q_u32) \ @@ -51,8 +52,15 @@ VARIANT (int64, 2, q_s64) \ VARIANT (poly8, 16, q_p8) \ VARIANT (poly16, 8, q_p16) \ VARIANT (float16, 8, q_f16) \ -VARIANT (float32, 4, q_f32) \ +VARIANT (float32, 4, q_f32) + +#ifdef __aarch64__ +#define VARIANTS(VARIANT) VARIANTS_1(VARIANT) \ +VARIANT (float64, 1, _f64) \ VARIANT (float64, 2, q_f64) +#else +#define VARIANTS(VARIANT) VARIANTS_1(VARIANT) +#endif /* Tests of vld1_x2 and vld1q_x2. */ VARIANTS (TESTMETH)
Hi all, This recently added test fails on arm. We haven't implemented these intrinsics for arm (any volunteers?) so for now let's XFAIL these on that target. Also, the float64 versions of these intrinsics are not supposed to be available on arm so this patch slightly adjusts the test to not include them for aarch32. In any case the entire test is XFAILed on arm, so this doesn't have any noticeable effect. The same number of tests (PASS) still occur on aarch64 but now they appear as XFAIL rather than FAIL on arm. Ok for trunk? (from an aarch64 perspective). Thanks, Kyrill 2018-01-11 Kyrylo Tkachov <kyrylo.tkachov@arm.com> * gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/vld1x2.c: Make float64 tests specific to aarch64. XFAIL test on arm.