Patchwork cost model patch

login
register
mail settings
Submitter Kyrylo Tkachov
Date Oct. 1, 2013, 9:33 a.m.
Message ID <524A9700.8090607@arm.com>
Download mbox | patch
Permalink /patch/279384/
State New
Headers show

Comments

Kyrylo Tkachov - Oct. 1, 2013, 9:33 a.m.
On 01/10/13 09:28, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 5:26 PM, Xinliang David Li <davidxl@google.com> wrote:
>> Yes, that will do.  Can you do it for me? I can't  do testing easily
>> on arm myself.
> It also fails on x86_64 with -m32.  I always test on x86_64 with
> multilibs enabled:
>
> make -k -j12 check RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=unix/\{,-m32\}"

Appears on aarch64-none-elf as well...
This patch makes the tests pass for me.

I notice there's PR58556 that talks about these failures, so shall I link this 
patch to this PR?

Ok to apply?

Kyrill

P.S. Since we've changed the default cost model for the vectoriser, perhaps we 
should consider reorganising the vectoriser tests taking into consideration what 
tests apply to which cost model?

[gcc/testsuite/]
2013-10-01  Kyrylo Tkachov  <kyrylo.tkachov@arm.com>

     PR tree-optimization/58556
     * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/gen-vect-26.c: Use dynamic vector cost model.
     * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/gen-vect-28.c: Likewise.
Richard Guenther - Oct. 1, 2013, 10:51 a.m.
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Kyrill Tkachov <kyrylo.tkachov@arm.com> wrote:
> On 01/10/13 09:28, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 5:26 PM, Xinliang David Li <davidxl@google.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes, that will do.  Can you do it for me? I can't  do testing easily
>>> on arm myself.
>>
>> It also fails on x86_64 with -m32.  I always test on x86_64 with
>> multilibs enabled:
>>
>> make -k -j12 check RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=unix/\{,-m32\}"
>
>
> Appears on aarch64-none-elf as well...
> This patch makes the tests pass for me.
>
> I notice there's PR58556 that talks about these failures, so shall I link
> this patch to this PR?
>
> Ok to apply?

Ok.

Thanks,
Richard.

> Kyrill
>
> P.S. Since we've changed the default cost model for the vectoriser, perhaps
> we should consider reorganising the vectoriser tests taking into
> consideration what tests apply to which cost model?
>
> [gcc/testsuite/]
> 2013-10-01  Kyrylo Tkachov  <kyrylo.tkachov@arm.com>
>
>     PR tree-optimization/58556
>     * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/gen-vect-26.c: Use dynamic vector cost model.
>     * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/gen-vect-28.c: Likewise.

Patch

diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/gen-vect-26.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/gen-vect-26.c
index f14bf83..dadeb07 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/gen-vect-26.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/gen-vect-26.c
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ 
 /* { dg-do run { target vect_cmdline_needed } } */
-/* { dg-options "-O2 -ftree-vectorize -fdump-tree-vect-details" } */
-/* { dg-options "-O2 -ftree-vectorize -fdump-tree-vect-details -mno-sse" { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } } } */
+/* { dg-options "-O2 -ftree-vectorize -fdump-tree-vect-details -fvect-cost-model=dynamic" } */
+/* { dg-options "-O2 -ftree-vectorize -fdump-tree-vect-details -fvect-cost-model=dynamic -mno-sse" { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } } } */
 
 #include <stdlib.h>
 
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/gen-vect-28.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/gen-vect-28.c
index d90520e..f314b28 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/gen-vect-28.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/gen-vect-28.c
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ 
 /* { dg-do run { target vect_cmdline_needed } } */
-/* { dg-options "-O2 -ftree-vectorize -fdump-tree-vect-details" } */
-/* { dg-options "-O2 -ftree-vectorize -fdump-tree-vect-details -mno-sse" { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } } } */
+/* { dg-options "-O2 -ftree-vectorize -fdump-tree-vect-details -fvect-cost-model=dynamic" } */
+/* { dg-options "-O2 -ftree-vectorize -fdump-tree-vect-details -fvect-cost-model=dynamic -mno-sse" { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } } } */
 
 #include <stdlib.h>