On Fri, 2020-05-01 at 10:48 -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 05:01:34PM -0500, will schmidt wrote:
> > On Mon, 2020-04-27 at 15:53 -0400, Michael Meissner via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> > > This patch adds a test that verifies that the compiler generates
> > > a prefixed
> > > load/store instruction where the compiler cannot generate the
> > > instruction
> > > directly because the offset is not a valid DS or DQ offset. A DS
> > > offset must
> > > have the bottom 2 bits clear. A DQ offset must have the bottom 4
> > > bits clear.
> > > Due to the way PowerPC instructions are encoded, some
> > > instructions use the DS
> > > format and some use the DQ format.
> > >
> > > This is patch #3 of 7. The tests in this patch run on a little
> > > endian power8
> > > system running Linux.
> > >
> > >
<snip>
> "long long".
>
> > > +void
> > > +store_float_offset1 (float f, unsigned char *p)
> > > +{
> > > + *(float *)(p + 1) = f; /* should generate STF. */
> >
> > Comment should be STFD ?
> >
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +void
> > > +store_double_offset1 (double d, unsigned char *p)
> > > +{
> > > + *(double *)(p + 1) = d; /* should generate
> > > STD. */
> >
> > Comment should be STFS ?
>
> The other way around :-) stfs is for single precision float
> ("float",
> in C), while stfd is for double precision float ("double", in C).
I came up with my comment based on what was being tested for further
below. If the comment is correct the test below is wrong.
(unless i mis-counted something .. always possible but worth double-
checking). :-)
Thanks,
-Will
>
> > > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mextsb\M} 1 } } */
>
> Maybe also test there are no extsh and extsw generated?
>
>
> Segher
