On Thu, 2017-03-09 at 17:24 -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> Hi Will,
>
> On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 10:52:52AM -0600, Will Schmidt wrote:
> > Per PR79941, we are folding the vec_mul{e,o}* operations improperly. Those
> > entries were added to the intrinsics-to-be-folded list where the generic
> > multiplies should have been instead. Test coverage in place was for the
> > generic multiplies, and this was missed by my testing.
> >
> > The mul[eo]* unsigned operations were missing entries in
> > builtin_function_type()
> > to indicate the overloaded arguments were unsigned. This is corrected here,
> > and those operations now fold accurately to the desired instruction.
> >
> > Testcases have been added for the mule/mulo operations, as well as a dg-do
> > run test based on the testcase in the PR. I'll note that the variables in
> > that
> > test case are now marked as volatile so they are not entirely optimized out
> > during
> > the compile.
> >
> > OK for trunk?
> > regtest is currently running on ppc64*.
>
>
>
> > PR target/79941
> > * config/rs6000/rs6000.c (builtin_function_type): Add VMUL*UH
> > entries to the case statement that marks unsigned arguments to
> > overloaded functions.
>
> UH and UB?
Yes. I've updated that to read "Add VMUL*U[HB]" in my local copy.
>
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-mule-char.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
> > +/* Verify that overloaded built-ins for vec_mule,vec_mulo with char
> > + inputs produce the right results. */
> > +
> > +/* { dg-do compile } */
> > +/* { dg-require-effective-target powerpc_altivec_ok } */
> > +/* { dg-options "-maltivec -O2 " } */
>
> ^ this space looks off
It is. fixed locally in both *mule-char.c and *mule-short.c testcases.
>
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-mule-misc.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
> > +/* PR target/79941 */
> > +
> > +/* { dg-do run } */
> > +/* { dg-require-effective-target powerpc_vsx_ok } */
> > +/* { dg-options "-mvsx -O2 -save-temps" } */
>
> I think that -save-temps is a leftover from testing? It shouldn't be there?
Because this is a "dg-do run", and I am also doing a scan-assembler
stanza at the end, I needed that to preserve the intermediate. I can
rework things if this is not considered proper.. :-)
>
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-mule-short.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
> > +/* Verify that overloaded built-ins for vec_mule,vec_mulo with short
> > + inputs produce the right results. */
> > +
> > +/* { dg-do compile } */
> > +/* { dg-require-effective-target powerpc_altivec_ok } */
> > +/* { dg-options "-maltivec -O2 " } */
>
> ^ another
yup, got it updated locally now, thanks.
>
> Okay with those nits fixed, but let's hear if Mike remembers anything first.
yup.
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Segher
>
