From patchwork Mon Oct 22 08:15:06 2012 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Bin Cheng X-Patchwork-Id: 193106 Return-Path: X-Original-To: incoming@patchwork.ozlabs.org Delivered-To: patchwork-incoming@bilbo.ozlabs.org Received: from sourceware.org (server1.sourceware.org [209.132.180.131]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EBF552C007F for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2012 19:20:56 +1100 (EST) Comment: DKIM? See http://www.dkim.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; x=1351498859; h=Comment: DomainKey-Signature:Received:Received:Received:Received:Received: From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type:Mailing-List:Precedence:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:Sender: Delivered-To; bh=rl6ifFsxJcCELhggJhg+Lv3DP1M=; b=vMJ8BSuLNeT88bV OFPKQZBtcXMgk1ctaQnT3Wibq5TzC2RQN8lOtZnxfrjYE6Y3WZzlK3nrpisOneCR tPMDk6us+9s4NfEFLTH2seShKf5fTUye9iSrlJvJoTTk1bjdt9FmYraBKzVEl/VT qN0h+kBClRZVvUKc3bqusmglGO8s= Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=gcc.gnu.org; h=Received:Received:X-SWARE-Spam-Status:X-Spam-Check-By:Received:Received:Received:From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:X-MC-Unique:Content-Type:X-IsSubscribed:Mailing-List:Precedence:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:Sender:Delivered-To; b=t72qgsiEf8inGzgK6WrZkykKBEoTVdmY9zETPo6E9bU+xmqwDHJWdyHIts65e5 q0Tf9obKhxISh1qT5ezEYqVoJZ3elGLNHTmwPo/FP0DK3yVZOp1/zx7Jn332nJHC smSMINkCV25vC7MR1ZM60pMy9OH/a2iqahDlZhE/EC4Xo=; Received: (qmail 6314 invoked by alias); 22 Oct 2012 08:20:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 6304 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Oct 2012 08:20:45 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL, BAYES_00, KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST, KHOP_THREADED, MSGID_MULTIPLE_AT, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from service87.mimecast.com (HELO service87.mimecast.com) (91.220.42.44) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 22 Oct 2012 08:20:40 +0000 Received: from cam-owa1.Emea.Arm.com (fw-tnat.cambridge.arm.com [217.140.96.21]) by service87.mimecast.com; Mon, 22 Oct 2012 09:20:38 +0100 Received: from Binsh02 ([10.1.255.212]) by cam-owa1.Emea.Arm.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.0); Mon, 22 Oct 2012 09:20:35 +0100 From: "Bin Cheng" To: "'Jakub Jelinek'" Cc: References: <001d01cdb001$59be9310$0d3bb930$@cheng@arm.com> <20121022071546.GA1752@tucnak.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20121022071546.GA1752@tucnak.redhat.com> Subject: RE: [PATCH GCC]Fix test case failure reported in PR54989 Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 16:15:06 +0800 Message-ID: <002101cdb02d$5a6ca960$0f45fc20$@cheng@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MC-Unique: 112102209203803001 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > -----Original Message----- > From: Jakub Jelinek [mailto:jakub@redhat.com] > Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 3:16 PM > To: Bin Cheng > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH GCC]Fix test case failure reported in PR54989 > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 11:00:08AM +0800, Bin Cheng wrote: > > The test case "gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/hoist-register-pressure.c" is > > failed on x86_64-apple-darwin because it uses more registers than > > x86_64-linux. This can be fixed by simplifying the case using fewer > registers. > > > > Tested on x86_64-apple-darwin/x86_64-linux, is it OK? > > I'd say it is better to do the scan-rtl-dump only on nonpic targets, that way > it won't be done on darwin or for testing with --target_board=unix/-fpic where > it would fail too. You can add the test with smaller register pressure as a > new test (hoist-register-pressure2.c). > Hi Jakub, Thanks for the suggestion. Updated patch as attached. Now it can work with -fPIC/-fno-PIC options. Tested on x86_64-apple-darwin/x86-linux, is it OK. Thanks gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog 2012-10-22 Bin Cheng * gcc.dg/hoist-register-pressure-1.c: Rename from hoist-register-pressure.c. Add nonpic condition. * gcc.dg/hoist-register-pressure-2.c: New test. Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/hoist-register-pressure-1.c =================================================================== --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/hoist-register-pressure-1.c (revision 0) +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/hoist-register-pressure-1.c (revision 0) @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@ +/* { dg-options "-Os -fdump-rtl-hoist" } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-rtl-dump "PRE/HOIST: end of bb .* copying expression" "hoist" { target { nonpic } } } } */ + +#define BUF 100 +int a[BUF]; + +void com (int); +void bar (int); + +int foo (int x, int y, int z) +{ + /* "x+y" won't be hoisted if "-fira-hoist-pressure" is disabled, + because its rtx_cost is too small. */ + if (z) + { + a[1] = a[0] + a[2]; + a[2] = a[1] + a[3]; + a[3] = a[2] + a[4]; + a[4] = a[3] + a[5]; + a[5] = a[4] + a[6]; + a[6] = a[5] + a[7]; + a[7] = a[6] + a[8]; + com (x+y); + } + else + { + bar (x+y); + } + + return 0; +} Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/hoist-register-pressure-2.c =================================================================== --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/hoist-register-pressure-2.c (revision 0) +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/hoist-register-pressure-2.c (revision 0) @@ -0,0 +1,32 @@ +/* { dg-options "-Os -fdump-rtl-hoist" } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-rtl-dump "PRE/HOIST: end of bb .* copying expression" "hoist" } } */ + +#define BUF 100 +int a[BUF]; + +void com (int); +void bar (int); + +int foo (int x, int y, int z) +{ + /* "x+y" won't be hoisted if "-fira-hoist-pressure" is disabled, + because its rtx_cost is too small. */ + if (z) + { + a[1] = a[0]; + a[2] = a[1]; + a[3] = a[3]; + a[4] = a[5]; + a[5] = a[7]; + a[6] = a[11]; + a[7] = a[13]; + a[8] = a[17]; + com (x+y); + } + else + { + bar (x+y); + } + + return 0; +} Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/hoist-register-pressure.c =================================================================== --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/hoist-register-pressure.c (revision 192629) +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/hoist-register-pressure.c (working copy) @@ -1,31 +0,0 @@ -/* { dg-options "-Os -fdump-rtl-hoist" } */ -/* { dg-final { scan-rtl-dump "PRE/HOIST: end of bb .* copying expression" "hoist" } } */ - -#define BUF 100 -int a[BUF]; - -void com (int); -void bar (int); - -int foo (int x, int y, int z) -{ - /* "x+y" won't be hoisted if "-fira-hoist-pressure" is disabled, - because its rtx_cost is too small. */ - if (z) - { - a[1] = a[0] + a[2]; - a[2] = a[1] + a[3]; - a[3] = a[2] + a[4]; - a[4] = a[3] + a[5]; - a[5] = a[4] + a[6]; - a[6] = a[5] + a[7]; - a[7] = a[6] + a[8]; - com (x+y); - } - else - { - bar (x+y); - } - - return 0; -}