On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 16:35, Richard Sandiford <richard.sandif...@arm.com> wrote:
> Christophe Lyon <christophe.l...@linaro.org> writes: > > On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 at 00:20, Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On 9/11/19 1:17 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: > > > This is a straight replacement of an existing "full or partial" > > > call-clobber check. > > > > > > > > > 2019-09-11 Richard Sandiford <richard.sandif...@arm.com> > > > > > > gcc/ > > > * sched-deps.c (deps_analyze_insn): Use the ABI of the target > > > function to test whether a register is fully or partly > clobbered. > > OK > > jeff > > > > > > Hi Richard, > > > > My testing shows regressions on arm after you applied this patch > (r276335): > > For instance on arm-none-linux-gnueabi > > --with-mode arm > > --with-cpu cortex-a9 > > FAIL: gcc.dg/strlenopt-18g.c execution test > > > > If you force -march=armv5t via RUNTESTFLAGS, there's an additional > failure: > > FAIL: gcc.dg/strlenopt-19.c execution test > > > > In fortran, I see different sets of regressions depending on arm vs > thumb mode. > > target arm-none-linux-gnueabi > > --with-mode arm > > --with-cpu cortex-a9 > > I get these new FAILs: > > gfortran.dg/char4_iunit_1.f03 -O0 execution test > > gfortran.dg/char4_iunit_1.f03 -O1 execution test > > gfortran.dg/char4_iunit_1.f03 -O2 execution test > > gfortran.dg/char4_iunit_1.f03 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer > -funroll-loops > > -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions execution test > > gfortran.dg/char4_iunit_1.f03 -O3 -g execution test > > gfortran.dg/char4_iunit_1.f03 -Os execution test > > gfortran.dg/namelist_16.f90 -O0 execution test > > gfortran.dg/namelist_16.f90 -O1 execution test > > gfortran.dg/namelist_16.f90 -O2 execution test > > gfortran.dg/namelist_16.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops > > -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions execution test > > gfortran.dg/namelist_16.f90 -O3 -g execution test > > gfortran.dg/namelist_16.f90 -Os execution test > > gfortran.dg/namelist_95.f90 -O0 execution test > > gfortran.dg/namelist_95.f90 -O1 execution test > > gfortran.dg/namelist_95.f90 -O2 execution test > > gfortran.dg/namelist_95.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops > > -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions execution test > > gfortran.dg/namelist_95.f90 -O3 -g execution test > > gfortran.dg/namelist_95.f90 -Os execution test > > gfortran.dg/real_const_3.f90 -O0 execution test > > gfortran.dg/real_const_3.f90 -O1 execution test > > gfortran.dg/real_const_3.f90 -O2 execution test > > gfortran.dg/real_const_3.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer > -funroll-loops > > -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions execution test > > gfortran.dg/real_const_3.f90 -O3 -g execution test > > gfortran.dg/real_const_3.f90 -Os execution test > > > > > > When defaulting to thumb: > > target arm-none-linux-gnueabi > > --with-mode thumb > > --with-cpu cortex-a9 > > I get these new FAILs: > > gfortran.dg/f2003_io_5.f03 -O0 execution test > > gfortran.dg/f2003_io_5.f03 -O1 execution test > > gfortran.dg/f2003_io_5.f03 -O2 execution test > > gfortran.dg/f2003_io_5.f03 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops > > -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions execution test > > gfortran.dg/f2003_io_5.f03 -O3 -g execution test > > gfortran.dg/f2003_io_5.f03 -Os execution test > > gfortran.dg/real_const_3.f90 -O0 execution test > > gfortran.dg/real_const_3.f90 -O1 execution test > > gfortran.dg/real_const_3.f90 -O2 execution test > > gfortran.dg/real_const_3.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer > -funroll-loops > > -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions execution test > > gfortran.dg/real_const_3.f90 -O3 -g execution test > > gfortran.dg/real_const_3.f90 -Os execution test > > > > This is the most recent validation result I have so far, so maybe you > already > > fixed the problem? > > This sounds very like > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-10/msg00170.html > Let me know if you see any remaining failures after that though. > > Sure, thanks for the quick reply! > Thanks, > Richard >
