On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 11:08 AM Rainer Orth
<r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de> wrote:
>
> When using the Solaris/x86 assembler with gcc, a couple of testcases
> currently FAIL. Those failures follow two patterns:
>
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx512bw-vpmovb2m-2.c (test for excess errors)
> Excess errors:
> Assembler: avx512bw-vpmovb2m-2.c
> "/var/tmp//ccPh3IRc.s", line 58 : Invalid instruction argument
> Near line: " vpmovb2m %zmm0, %k0"
>
> and
>
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx512dq-vreducesd-2.c (test for excess errors)
> Excess errors:
> Assembler: avx512dq-vreducesd-2.c
> "/var/tmp//ccVyU7Bc.s", line 54 : Invalid instruction argument
> Near line: " vreducesd $35, {sae}, %xmm0, %xmm0, %xmm7"
>
> The first only started with
>
> x86: relax mask register constraints
>
> 2019-01-04 Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>
>
> * config/i386/sse.md
> (<avx512>_cmp<mode>3<mask_scalar_merge_name><round_saeonly_name>,
> [...]
>
> and is strange since even the current Intel 64 and IA-32 Architectures
> Software Developer's Manual only lists %k1 for vpmovb2m and related
> insns, and indeed the line assembles with %k0 changed to %k1.
This is a bug in the assembler. SDE just indexes registers in this
way, and %k0 can be assembled without problems:
0: 62 f2 7e 48 29 c0 vpmovb2m %zmm0,%k0
>
> The second is due to the use of {sae}: either this is a Solaris as bug
> (the do claim AVX512DQ support) or they use a different syntax here:
> omitting {sae} lets the line assemble as well.
>
> To avoid those failures, I've extended the avx512bw and avx512dq
> effective-target checks to include code snippets that trigger the
> generation of those insns.
>
> Tested no i386-pc-solaris2.11 with as (the failures are gone, as
> expected) and gas (test results unchanged).
>
> Ok for master?
I think we should not change the tests. These are clear bugs in the
assembler, so they should be fixed in the assembler, not papered over
in the testsuite.
Uros.
