Hi Segher,
on 2019/7/9 上午12:32, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> Hi Kewen,
>
> On Mon, Jul 08, 2019 at 04:07:00PM +0800, Kewen.Lin wrote:
>> gcc/ChangeLog
>
> (You have trailing spaces in the changelog, fwiw).
>
Thanks for catching!
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr88497-1.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
>> +/* { dg-do run } */
>> +/* { dg-require-effective-target vect_double } */
>> +/* { dg-require-effective-target powerpc_vsx_ok { target { powerpc*-*-* } }
>> } */
>
> For "dg-do run" tests, you need "powerpc_vsx_hw". "_ok" only tests if
> the assembler can handle VSX instructions, not whether the test system
> can run them. (powerpc_vsx_ok is what you need for "dg-do assemble" or
> "dg-do link" tests. It also tests if you can use -mvsx, but that doesn't
> do what you might hope it does: you can use -mvsx together with a -mcpu=
> that doesn't support VSX, for example).
>
Thanks, I will update it. But sorry that I can't find "powerpc_vsx_hw" but
"vsx_hw_available". I guess it's the one you are referring to? And I happened
to find the vect_double will force powerpc to check vsx_hw_available.
This reminds me I should use sse2 instead of sse2-runtime for case 2-5.
>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr88497-2.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
>> +/* { dg-do compile } */
>> +/* { dg-require-effective-target vect_float } */
>> +/* { dg-require-effective-target powerpc_altivec_ok { target { powerpc*-*-*
>> } } } */
>
> This one is fine, and the rest of the tests as well.
>
>
> Segher
>
