> On Feb 8, 2018, at 4:52 AM, Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Feb 3, 2018 at 12:30 AM, Bill Schmidt
> <wschm...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> The test g++.dg/vect/slp-pr56812.cc is somewhat fragile and is currently
>> failing
>> on several targets. PR81038 notes that this began with r248678, which
>> stopped
>> some inferior peeling solutions from preventing vectorization that could be
>> done
>> without peeling. I observed that for powerpc64le, r248677 vectorizes the
>> code
>> during SLP, but r248678 vectorizes it during the loop vectorization pass.
>> Which
>> pass does the vectorization is quite dependent on cost model, which for us
>> is a
>> quite close decision. In any case, the important thing is that the code is
>> vectorized, not which pass does it.
>>
>> This patch prevents the test from flipping in and out of failure status
>> depending
>> on which pass does the vectorization, by testing the final "optimized" dump
>> for
>> the expected vectorized output instead of relying on a specific vectorization
>> pass dump.
>>
>> By the way, the test case somehow had gotten DOS/Windows newlines into it, so
>> I removed those. The ^M characters disappeared when I pasted into this
>> mailer,
>> unfortunately. Anyway, that's the reason for the full replacement of the
>> file.
>> The only real changes are the dg-final directives and the documentation of
>> the
>> expected output.
>>
>> Verified on powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu. Is this okay for trunk?
>
> Hmm. That removes the existing XFAIL. Also wouldn't it be more elegant to do
> the following? This makes the testcase pass on x86_64, thus committed ;)
Terrific, thanks!
Bill
>
> Richard.
>
> 2018-02-08 Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de>
>
> * g++.dg/vect/slp-pr56812.cc: Allow either basic-block or
> loop vectorization to happen.
>
> Index: gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/vect/slp-pr56812.cc
> ===================================================================
> --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/vect/slp-pr56812.cc (revision 257477)
> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/vect/slp-pr56812.cc (working copy)
> @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
> /* { dg-do compile } */
> /* { dg-require-effective-target vect_float } */
> /* { dg-require-effective-target vect_hw_misalign } */
> -/* { dg-additional-options "-O3 -funroll-loops -fvect-cost-model=dynamic" }
> */
> +/* { dg-additional-options "-O3 -funroll-loops
> -fvect-cost-model=dynamic -fopt-info-vec" } */
>
> class mydata {
> public:
> @@ -13,10 +13,7 @@ public:
>
> void mydata::Set (float x)
> {
> - for (int i=0; i<upper(); i++)
> + /* We want to vectorize this either as loop or basic-block. */
> + for (int i=0; i<upper(); i++) /* { dg-message "note: \[^\n\]*
> vectorized" } */
> data[i] = x;
> }
> -
> -/* For targets without vector loop peeling the loop becomes cheap
> - enough to be vectorized. */
> -/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "basic block vectorized" 1
> "slp1" { xfail { ! vect_peeling_profitable } } } } */
>
>> Thanks,
>> Bill
>>
>>
>> 2018-02-02 Bill Schmidt <wschm...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>
>> * g++.dg/vect/slp-pr56812.cc: Convert from DOS newline characters
>> to utf-8-unix. Change to scan "optimized" dump for indications
>> that the code was vectorized.
>>
>>
>> Index: gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/vect/slp-pr56812.cc
>> ===================================================================
>> --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/vect/slp-pr56812.cc (revision 257352)
>> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/vect/slp-pr56812.cc (working copy)
>> @@ -1,22 +1,31 @@
>> -/* { dg-do compile } */
>> -/* { dg-require-effective-target vect_float } */
>> -/* { dg-require-effective-target vect_hw_misalign } */
>> -/* { dg-additional-options "-O3 -funroll-loops -fvect-cost-model=dynamic" }
>> */
>> -
>> -class mydata {
>> -public:
>> - mydata() {Set(-1.0);}
>> - void Set (float);
>> - static int upper() {return 8;}
>> - float data[8];
>> -};
>> -
>> -void mydata::Set (float x)
>> -{
>> - for (int i=0; i<upper(); i++)
>> - data[i] = x;
>> -}
>> -
>> -/* For targets without vector loop peeling the loop becomes cheap
>> - enough to be vectorized. */
>> -/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "basic block vectorized" 1 "slp1" {
>> xfail { ! vect_peeling_profitable } } } } */
>> +/* { dg-do compile } */
>> +/* { dg-require-effective-target vect_float } */
>> +/* { dg-require-effective-target vect_hw_misalign } */
>> +/* { dg-additional-options "-O3 -funroll-loops -fvect-cost-model=dynamic
>> -fdump-tree-optimized" } */
>> +
>> +class mydata {
>> +public:
>> + mydata() {Set(-1.0);}
>> + void Set (float);
>> + static int upper() {return 8;}
>> + float data[8];
>> +};
>> +
>> +void mydata::Set (float x)
>> +{
>> + for (int i=0; i<upper(); i++)
>> + data[i] = x;
>> +}
>> +
>> +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump "vect_cst__\[0-9\]* = " "optimized" } } */
>> +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "= vect_cst__\[0-9\]*;" 2 "optimized"
>> } } */
>> +
>> +/* Expected vectorized output is something like:
>> +
>> + <bb 2> [11.11%]:
>> + vect_cst__10 = {x_5(D), x_5(D), x_5(D), x_5(D)};
>> + MEM[(float *)this_4(D)] = vect_cst__10;
>> + MEM[(float *)this_4(D) + 16B] = vect_cst__10;
>> + return;
>> +
>> + Could be vectorized either by the "vect" or the "slp" pass. */
