| Message ID | 20180613185805.7833-11-dimitar@dinux.eu |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | New backend for the TI PRU processor | expand |
On 06/13/2018 02:58 PM, Dimitar Dimitrov wrote: > From: Dimitar Dimitrov <dddimitrov@mm-sol.com> > > For some targets, Pmode != UNITS_PER_WORD. Take this into account > when marking hard registers as being used. > > I tested C and C++ testsuits for x86_64 with and without this > patch. There was no regression, i.e. gcc.sum and g++.sum matched > exactly. > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > 2018-06-13 Dimitar Dimitrov <dimitar@dinux.eu> > > * lra-eliminations.c (set_ptr_hard_reg_bits): New function. > (update_reg_eliminate): Mark all spanning hw registers. > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > > 2018-06-13 Dimitar Dimitrov <dimitar@dinux.eu> > > * gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-1.c: New test. > * gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-2.c: New test. > > Cc: Vladimir Makarov <vmakarov@redhat.com> > Cc: Peter Bergner <bergner@vnet.ibm.com> > Cc: Kenneth Zadeck <zadeck@naturalbridge.com> > Cc: Seongbae Park <seongbae.park@gmail.com> > Signed-off-by: Dimitar Dimitrov <dddimitrov@mm-sol.com> > --- > gcc/lra-eliminations.c | 14 ++++- > .../pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-1.c | 33 ++++++++++++ > .../pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-2.c | 61 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > 3 files changed, 106 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-1.c > create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-2.c > > diff --git a/gcc/lra-eliminations.c b/gcc/lra-eliminations.c > index 21d8d5f8018..566cc2c8248 100644 > --- a/gcc/lra-eliminations.c > +++ b/gcc/lra-eliminations.c > @@ -1180,6 +1180,16 @@ spill_pseudos (HARD_REG_SET set) > bitmap_clear (&to_process); > } > > +static void set_ptr_hard_reg_bits (HARD_REG_SET *hard_reg_set, int r) > +{ > + int w; > + > + for (w = 0; w < GET_MODE_SIZE (Pmode); w += UNITS_PER_WORD, r++) > + { > + SET_HARD_REG_BIT (*hard_reg_set, r); > + } > +} > + The patch itself is ok but for uniformity I'd use for (int i = hard_regno_nregs (r, Pmode) - 1; i >= 0; i--) SET_HARD_REG_BIT (*hard_reg_set, r + i); Approved with the above change.
On 06/21/2018 11:44 AM, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > > > On 06/13/2018 02:58 PM, Dimitar Dimitrov wrote: >> From: Dimitar Dimitrov <dddimitrov@mm-sol.com> >> >> For some targets, Pmode != UNITS_PER_WORD. Take this into account >> when marking hard registers as being used. >> >> I tested C and C++ testsuits for x86_64 with and without this >> patch. There was no regression, i.e. gcc.sum and g++.sum matched >> exactly. >> >> gcc/ChangeLog: >> >> 2018-06-13 Dimitar Dimitrov <dimitar@dinux.eu> >> >> * lra-eliminations.c (set_ptr_hard_reg_bits): New function. >> (update_reg_eliminate): Mark all spanning hw registers. >> >> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: >> >> 2018-06-13 Dimitar Dimitrov <dimitar@dinux.eu> >> >> * gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-1.c: New test. >> * gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-2.c: New test. >> >> Cc: Vladimir Makarov <vmakarov@redhat.com> >> Cc: Peter Bergner <bergner@vnet.ibm.com> >> Cc: Kenneth Zadeck <zadeck@naturalbridge.com> >> Cc: Seongbae Park <seongbae.park@gmail.com> >> Signed-off-by: Dimitar Dimitrov <dddimitrov@mm-sol.com> >> --- >> gcc/lra-eliminations.c | 14 ++++- >> .../pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-1.c | 33 ++++++++++++ >> .../pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-2.c | 61 >> ++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 3 files changed, 106 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> create mode 100644 >> gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-1.c >> create mode 100644 >> gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-2.c >> >> diff --git a/gcc/lra-eliminations.c b/gcc/lra-eliminations.c >> index 21d8d5f8018..566cc2c8248 100644 >> --- a/gcc/lra-eliminations.c >> +++ b/gcc/lra-eliminations.c >> @@ -1180,6 +1180,16 @@ spill_pseudos (HARD_REG_SET set) >> bitmap_clear (&to_process); >> } >> +static void set_ptr_hard_reg_bits (HARD_REG_SET *hard_reg_set, int r) >> +{ >> + int w; >> + >> + for (w = 0; w < GET_MODE_SIZE (Pmode); w += UNITS_PER_WORD, r++) >> + { >> + SET_HARD_REG_BIT (*hard_reg_set, r); >> + } >> +} >> + > The patch itself is ok but for uniformity I'd use > > for (int i = hard_regno_nregs (r, Pmode) - 1; i >= 0; i--) > SET_HARD_REG_BIT (*hard_reg_set, r + i); I'm a bit surprised we don't already have a utility function to do this. Hmmm add_to_hard_reg_set (hard_reg_set, Pmode, r) So instead LRA ought to be using that function in the places where calls to set_ptr_hard_reg_bits were introduced. Dimitar, can you verify that change works? Jeff
On четвъртък, 21 юни 2018 г. 17:03:55 EEST Jeff Law wrote: > On 06/21/2018 11:44 AM, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > > On 06/13/2018 02:58 PM, Dimitar Dimitrov wrote: > >> From: Dimitar Dimitrov <dddimitrov@mm-sol.com> > >> > >> For some targets, Pmode != UNITS_PER_WORD. Take this into account > >> when marking hard registers as being used. > >> > >> I tested C and C++ testsuits for x86_64 with and without this > >> patch. There was no regression, i.e. gcc.sum and g++.sum matched > >> exactly. > >> > >> gcc/ChangeLog: > >> > >> 2018-06-13 Dimitar Dimitrov <dimitar@dinux.eu> > >> > >> * lra-eliminations.c (set_ptr_hard_reg_bits): New function. > >> (update_reg_eliminate): Mark all spanning hw registers. > >> > >> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > >> > >> 2018-06-13 Dimitar Dimitrov <dimitar@dinux.eu> > >> > >> * gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-1.c: New test. > >> * gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-2.c: New test. > >> > >> Cc: Vladimir Makarov <vmakarov@redhat.com> > >> Cc: Peter Bergner <bergner@vnet.ibm.com> > >> Cc: Kenneth Zadeck <zadeck@naturalbridge.com> > >> Cc: Seongbae Park <seongbae.park@gmail.com> > >> Signed-off-by: Dimitar Dimitrov <dddimitrov@mm-sol.com> > >> --- > >> gcc/lra-eliminations.c | 14 ++++- > >> .../pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-1.c | 33 ++++++++++++ > >> .../pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-2.c | 61 > >> ++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> 3 files changed, 106 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >> create mode 100644 > >> gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-1.c > >> create mode 100644 > >> gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-2.c > >> > >> diff --git a/gcc/lra-eliminations.c b/gcc/lra-eliminations.c > >> index 21d8d5f8018..566cc2c8248 100644 > >> --- a/gcc/lra-eliminations.c > >> +++ b/gcc/lra-eliminations.c > >> @@ -1180,6 +1180,16 @@ spill_pseudos (HARD_REG_SET set) > >> bitmap_clear (&to_process); > >> } > >> +static void set_ptr_hard_reg_bits (HARD_REG_SET *hard_reg_set, int r) > >> +{ > >> + int w; > >> + > >> + for (w = 0; w < GET_MODE_SIZE (Pmode); w += UNITS_PER_WORD, r++) > >> + { > >> + SET_HARD_REG_BIT (*hard_reg_set, r); > >> + } > >> +} > >> + > > > > The patch itself is ok but for uniformity I'd use > > > > for (int i = hard_regno_nregs (r, Pmode) - 1; i >= 0; i--) > > SET_HARD_REG_BIT (*hard_reg_set, r + i); > > I'm a bit surprised we don't already have a utility function to do this. > Hmmm > > add_to_hard_reg_set (hard_reg_set, Pmode, r) > > So instead LRA ought to be using that function in the places where calls > to set_ptr_hard_reg_bits were introduced. > > Dimitar, can you verify that change works? Thank you. I'll test it and will update the patch. The SET_HARD_REG_BIT call in check_pseudos_live_through_calls also seems suspicous to me. I'll try to come up with a regression test case to justify its upgrade to add_to_hard_reg_set(). Regards, Dimitar
On 06/21/2018 10:01 PM, Dimitar Dimitrov wrote: > On четвъртък, 21 юни 2018 г. 17:03:55 EEST Jeff Law wrote: >> On 06/21/2018 11:44 AM, Vladimir Makarov wrote: >>> On 06/13/2018 02:58 PM, Dimitar Dimitrov wrote: >>>> From: Dimitar Dimitrov <dddimitrov@mm-sol.com> >>>> >>>> For some targets, Pmode != UNITS_PER_WORD. Take this into account >>>> when marking hard registers as being used. >>>> >>>> I tested C and C++ testsuits for x86_64 with and without this >>>> patch. There was no regression, i.e. gcc.sum and g++.sum matched >>>> exactly. >>>> >>>> gcc/ChangeLog: >>>> >>>> 2018-06-13 Dimitar Dimitrov <dimitar@dinux.eu> >>>> >>>> * lra-eliminations.c (set_ptr_hard_reg_bits): New function. >>>> (update_reg_eliminate): Mark all spanning hw registers. >>>> >>>> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: >>>> >>>> 2018-06-13 Dimitar Dimitrov <dimitar@dinux.eu> >>>> >>>> * gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-1.c: New test. >>>> * gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-2.c: New test. >>>> >>>> Cc: Vladimir Makarov <vmakarov@redhat.com> >>>> Cc: Peter Bergner <bergner@vnet.ibm.com> >>>> Cc: Kenneth Zadeck <zadeck@naturalbridge.com> >>>> Cc: Seongbae Park <seongbae.park@gmail.com> >>>> Signed-off-by: Dimitar Dimitrov <dddimitrov@mm-sol.com> >>>> --- >>>> gcc/lra-eliminations.c | 14 ++++- >>>> .../pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-1.c | 33 ++++++++++++ >>>> .../pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-2.c | 61 >>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> 3 files changed, 106 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> create mode 100644 >>>> gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-1.c >>>> create mode 100644 >>>> gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-2.c >>>> >>>> diff --git a/gcc/lra-eliminations.c b/gcc/lra-eliminations.c >>>> index 21d8d5f8018..566cc2c8248 100644 >>>> --- a/gcc/lra-eliminations.c >>>> +++ b/gcc/lra-eliminations.c >>>> @@ -1180,6 +1180,16 @@ spill_pseudos (HARD_REG_SET set) >>>> bitmap_clear (&to_process); >>>> } >>>> +static void set_ptr_hard_reg_bits (HARD_REG_SET *hard_reg_set, int r) >>>> +{ >>>> + int w; >>>> + >>>> + for (w = 0; w < GET_MODE_SIZE (Pmode); w += UNITS_PER_WORD, r++) >>>> + { >>>> + SET_HARD_REG_BIT (*hard_reg_set, r); >>>> + } >>>> +} >>>> + >>> >>> The patch itself is ok but for uniformity I'd use >>> >>> for (int i = hard_regno_nregs (r, Pmode) - 1; i >= 0; i--) >>> SET_HARD_REG_BIT (*hard_reg_set, r + i); >> >> I'm a bit surprised we don't already have a utility function to do this. >> Hmmm >> >> add_to_hard_reg_set (hard_reg_set, Pmode, r) >> >> So instead LRA ought to be using that function in the places where calls >> to set_ptr_hard_reg_bits were introduced. >> >> Dimitar, can you verify that change works? > > Thank you. I'll test it and will update the patch. > > > The SET_HARD_REG_BIT call in check_pseudos_live_through_calls also seems > suspicous to me. I'll try to come up with a regression test case to justify > its upgrade to add_to_hard_reg_set(). I wouldn't be surprised if there's others, particularly WRT Pmode. Targets where Pmode != word_mode are relatively rare and those that exist aren't extensively tested. Jeff > > Regards, > Dimitar >
On 06/21/2018 10:01 PM, Dimitar Dimitrov wrote: > On четвъртък, 21 юни 2018 г. 17:03:55 EEST Jeff Law wrote: >> On 06/21/2018 11:44 AM, Vladimir Makarov wrote: >>> On 06/13/2018 02:58 PM, Dimitar Dimitrov wrote: >>>> From: Dimitar Dimitrov <dddimitrov@mm-sol.com> >>>> >>>> For some targets, Pmode != UNITS_PER_WORD. Take this into account >>>> when marking hard registers as being used. >>>> >>>> I tested C and C++ testsuits for x86_64 with and without this >>>> patch. There was no regression, i.e. gcc.sum and g++.sum matched >>>> exactly. >>>> >>>> gcc/ChangeLog: >>>> >>>> 2018-06-13 Dimitar Dimitrov <dimitar@dinux.eu> >>>> >>>> * lra-eliminations.c (set_ptr_hard_reg_bits): New function. >>>> (update_reg_eliminate): Mark all spanning hw registers. >>>> >>>> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: >>>> >>>> 2018-06-13 Dimitar Dimitrov <dimitar@dinux.eu> >>>> >>>> * gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-1.c: New test. >>>> * gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-2.c: New test. >>>> >>>> Cc: Vladimir Makarov <vmakarov@redhat.com> >>>> Cc: Peter Bergner <bergner@vnet.ibm.com> >>>> Cc: Kenneth Zadeck <zadeck@naturalbridge.com> >>>> Cc: Seongbae Park <seongbae.park@gmail.com> >>>> Signed-off-by: Dimitar Dimitrov <dddimitrov@mm-sol.com> >>>> --- >>>> gcc/lra-eliminations.c | 14 ++++- >>>> .../pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-1.c | 33 ++++++++++++ >>>> .../pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-2.c | 61 >>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> 3 files changed, 106 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> create mode 100644 >>>> gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-1.c >>>> create mode 100644 >>>> gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-2.c >>>> >>>> diff --git a/gcc/lra-eliminations.c b/gcc/lra-eliminations.c >>>> index 21d8d5f8018..566cc2c8248 100644 >>>> --- a/gcc/lra-eliminations.c >>>> +++ b/gcc/lra-eliminations.c >>>> @@ -1180,6 +1180,16 @@ spill_pseudos (HARD_REG_SET set) >>>> bitmap_clear (&to_process); >>>> } >>>> +static void set_ptr_hard_reg_bits (HARD_REG_SET *hard_reg_set, int r) >>>> +{ >>>> + int w; >>>> + >>>> + for (w = 0; w < GET_MODE_SIZE (Pmode); w += UNITS_PER_WORD, r++) >>>> + { >>>> + SET_HARD_REG_BIT (*hard_reg_set, r); >>>> + } >>>> +} >>>> + >>> >>> The patch itself is ok but for uniformity I'd use >>> >>> for (int i = hard_regno_nregs (r, Pmode) - 1; i >= 0; i--) >>> SET_HARD_REG_BIT (*hard_reg_set, r + i); >> >> I'm a bit surprised we don't already have a utility function to do this. >> Hmmm >> >> add_to_hard_reg_set (hard_reg_set, Pmode, r) >> >> So instead LRA ought to be using that function in the places where calls >> to set_ptr_hard_reg_bits were introduced. >> >> Dimitar, can you verify that change works? > > Thank you. I'll test it and will update the patch. And go ahead and either break out the two new tests. I suspect we'll want to install the LRA patch immediately since it's an independent bugfix. > > > The SET_HARD_REG_BIT call in check_pseudos_live_through_calls also seems > suspicous to me. I'll try to come up with a regression test case to justify > its upgrade to add_to_hard_reg_set(). If you can construct a test, great, but from my reading it's clearly wrong as well and we ought to fix it too. Jeff ps. Do you have a copyright assignment on file with the FSF for GCC work?
On петък, 22 юни 2018 г. 10:37:10 EEST Jeff Law wrote: > On 06/21/2018 10:01 PM, Dimitar Dimitrov wrote: > > On четвъртък, 21 юни 2018 г. 17:03:55 EEST Jeff Law wrote: > >> On 06/21/2018 11:44 AM, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > >>> On 06/13/2018 02:58 PM, Dimitar Dimitrov wrote: > >>>> From: Dimitar Dimitrov <dddimitrov@mm-sol.com> > >>>> > >>>> For some targets, Pmode != UNITS_PER_WORD. Take this into account > >>>> when marking hard registers as being used. > >>>> > >>>> I tested C and C++ testsuits for x86_64 with and without this > >>>> patch. There was no regression, i.e. gcc.sum and g++.sum matched > >>>> exactly. > >>>> > >>>> gcc/ChangeLog: > >>>> > >>>> 2018-06-13 Dimitar Dimitrov <dimitar@dinux.eu> > >>>> > >>>> * lra-eliminations.c (set_ptr_hard_reg_bits): New function. > >>>> (update_reg_eliminate): Mark all spanning hw registers. > >>>> > >>>> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > >>>> > >>>> 2018-06-13 Dimitar Dimitrov <dimitar@dinux.eu> > >>>> > >>>> * gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-1.c: New test. > >>>> * gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-2.c: New test. > >>>> > >>>> Cc: Vladimir Makarov <vmakarov@redhat.com> > >>>> Cc: Peter Bergner <bergner@vnet.ibm.com> > >>>> Cc: Kenneth Zadeck <zadeck@naturalbridge.com> > >>>> Cc: Seongbae Park <seongbae.park@gmail.com> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Dimitar Dimitrov <dddimitrov@mm-sol.com> > >>>> --- > >>>> > >>>> gcc/lra-eliminations.c | 14 ++++- > >>>> .../pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-1.c | 33 ++++++++++++ > >>>> .../pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-2.c | 61 > >>>> > >>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++ > >>>> > >>>> 3 files changed, 106 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >>>> create mode 100644 > >>>> > >>>> gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-1.c > >>>> > >>>> create mode 100644 > >>>> > >>>> gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-2.c > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/gcc/lra-eliminations.c b/gcc/lra-eliminations.c > >>>> index 21d8d5f8018..566cc2c8248 100644 > >>>> --- a/gcc/lra-eliminations.c > >>>> +++ b/gcc/lra-eliminations.c > >>>> @@ -1180,6 +1180,16 @@ spill_pseudos (HARD_REG_SET set) > >>>> > >>>> bitmap_clear (&to_process); > >>>> > >>>> } > >>>> +static void set_ptr_hard_reg_bits (HARD_REG_SET *hard_reg_set, int > >>>> r) > >>>> > >>>> +{ > >>>> + int w; > >>>> + > >>>> + for (w = 0; w < GET_MODE_SIZE (Pmode); w += UNITS_PER_WORD, r++) > >>>> + { > >>>> + SET_HARD_REG_BIT (*hard_reg_set, r); > >>>> + } > >>>> +} > >>>> + > >>> > >>> The patch itself is ok but for uniformity I'd use > >>> > >>> for (int i = hard_regno_nregs (r, Pmode) - 1; i >= 0; i--) > >>> > >>> SET_HARD_REG_BIT (*hard_reg_set, r + i); > >> > >> I'm a bit surprised we don't already have a utility function to do this. > >> Hmmm > >> > >> add_to_hard_reg_set (hard_reg_set, Pmode, r) > >> > >> So instead LRA ought to be using that function in the places where calls > >> to set_ptr_hard_reg_bits were introduced. > >> > >> Dimitar, can you verify that change works? > > > > Thank you. I'll test it and will update the patch. > > And go ahead and either break out the two new tests. I suspect we'll > want to install the LRA patch immediately since it's an independent bugfix. I verified that add_to_hard_reg_set() fixes the failing tests for PRU. > > > The SET_HARD_REG_BIT call in check_pseudos_live_through_calls also seems > > suspicous to me. I'll try to come up with a regression test case to > > justify > > its upgrade to add_to_hard_reg_set(). > > If you can construct a test, great, but from my reading it's clearly > wrong as well and we ought to fix it too. I'll send a standalone LRA fix, without PRU tests. > > Jeff > > ps. Do you have a copyright assignment on file with the FSF for GCC work? Yes. FSF has my copyright assignment since November 2016 for GCC, Binutils and GDB. Regards, Dimitar
diff --git a/gcc/lra-eliminations.c b/gcc/lra-eliminations.c index 21d8d5f8018..566cc2c8248 100644 --- a/gcc/lra-eliminations.c +++ b/gcc/lra-eliminations.c @@ -1180,6 +1180,16 @@ spill_pseudos (HARD_REG_SET set) bitmap_clear (&to_process); } +static void set_ptr_hard_reg_bits (HARD_REG_SET *hard_reg_set, int r) +{ + int w; + + for (w = 0; w < GET_MODE_SIZE (Pmode); w += UNITS_PER_WORD, r++) + { + SET_HARD_REG_BIT (*hard_reg_set, r); + } +} + /* Update all offsets and possibility for elimination on eliminable registers. Spill pseudos assigned to registers which are uneliminable, update LRA_NO_ALLOC_REGS and ELIMINABLE_REG_SET. Add @@ -1264,13 +1274,13 @@ update_reg_eliminate (bitmap insns_with_changed_offsets) CLEAR_HARD_REG_SET (temp_hard_reg_set); for (ep = reg_eliminate; ep < ®_eliminate[NUM_ELIMINABLE_REGS]; ep++) if (elimination_map[ep->from] == NULL) - SET_HARD_REG_BIT (temp_hard_reg_set, ep->from); + set_ptr_hard_reg_bits (&temp_hard_reg_set, ep->from); else if (elimination_map[ep->from] == ep) { /* Prevent the hard register into which we eliminate from the usage for pseudos. */ if (ep->from != ep->to) - SET_HARD_REG_BIT (temp_hard_reg_set, ep->to); + set_ptr_hard_reg_bits (&temp_hard_reg_set, ep->to); if (maybe_ne (ep->previous_offset, ep->offset)) { bitmap_ior_into (insns_with_changed_offsets, diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-1.c new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..ee1288fc2ae --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-1.c @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ +/* { dg-do assemble } */ +/* { dg-options "-O1 -fno-omit-frame-pointer" } */ +#include <stdint.h> + +extern uint64_t global; + +uint64_t __attribute__((noinline)) test(uint64_t a, uint64_t b, + uint64_t c, uint64_t d, + uint64_t e, uint64_t f, + uint64_t g, uint64_t h) +{ + uint64_t l1 = 0x12345678, l2 = 0x87654321, l3 = 1001, l4 = 1002; + uint64_t l5 = 1004; + uint32_t l6 = 2005; + uint8_t c1 = 101, c2 = 102; + + /* The numerous dummy asm input operands create just + * enough register pressure to resort to using + * FP.b1 (r4.b1). + */ + + asm ("nop" /* { dg-error "'asm' operand has impossible constraints" } */ + : "=r" (l1) + : "0" (l1), "r" (a), "r"(b), + "r"(c), "r"(d), "r"(e), "r"(f), + "r"(g), "r"(h), "r"(l2), + "r"(c1), "r"(c2), + "r"(l3), "r"(l4), "r"(l5), "r"(l6)); + + global = a+b+c+d+e+f+g+h + c1+c2 + l2; + + return l1; +} diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-2.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-2.c new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..6c98e9bf13b --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/pru/lra-framepointer-fragmentation-2.c @@ -0,0 +1,61 @@ +/* { dg-do run } */ +/* { dg-options "-O1 -fomit-frame-pointer" } */ +#include <stdint.h> + +extern void abort (void); + +uint64_t global = 5; + +uint64_t __attribute__((noinline)) test(uint64_t a, uint64_t b, + uint64_t c, uint64_t d, + uint64_t e, uint64_t f, + uint64_t g, uint64_t h) +{ + uint64_t l1 = 0x12345678, l2 = 0x87654321, l3 = 1001, l4 = 1002; + uint64_t l5 = 1004; + uint32_t l6 = 2005; + uint8_t c1 = 101, c2 = 102; + + /* The numerous dummy asm input operands create just + * enough register pressure to resort to using FP (r4). + */ + + asm ("ldi32 %0, 0x11223344\n\t" + "add %0, %0, %2\n\t" + "add %0, %0, %3\n\t" + "add %0, %0, %4\n\t" + "add %0, %0, %5\n\t" + "add %0, %0, %6\n\t" + "add %0, %0, %7\n\t" + "add %0, %0, %8\n\t" + "add %0, %0, %9\n\t" + "add %0, %0, %10\n\t" + "add %0, %0, %11\n\t" + "add %0, %0, %12\n\t" + "add %0, %0, %13\n\t" + "add %0, %0, %14\n\t" + "add %0, %0, %15\n\t" + "add %0, %0, %16\n\t" + : "=r" (l1) + : "0" (l1), "r" (a), "r"(b), + "r"(c), "r"(d), "r"(e), "r"(f), + "r"(g), "r"(h), "r"(c1), "r"(c2), + "r"(l2), "r"(l3), "r"(l4), "r"(l5), "r"(l6)); + + global = a+b+c+d+e+f+g+h + c1+c2 + l2+l3+l4+l5+l6; + + return l1; +} + +int main() +{ + uint64_t a = test(1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8); + + if (a != 0x98878ae8) { + abort(); + } + if (global != 0x876557a4) { + abort(); + } + return 0; +}