Hi, Maciej. I have enable all vectorization test on RVV which is committed:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-October/632598.html But I have added every test with: + || ([istarget riscv*-*-*] + && [check_effective_target_riscv_v]) As you said, you think we don't need to add check_effective_target_riscv_v every time. So, feel free to adjust it (remove check_effective_target_riscv_v) and send a patch. But I hope you can adjust each set of tests carefully to make every thing consistent. Thanks. juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai From: Maciej W. Rozycki Date: 2023-10-11 05:35 To: juzhe.zhong CC: gcc-patches; jeffreyalaw; Robin Dapp; Kito.cheng Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] RISC-V/testsuite: Enable `vect_pack_trunc' On Tue, 10 Oct 2023, juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai wrote: > It's weird. Could you give me the FAILs report? I keep forgetting that I have a piece of code in my board description files that makes the testsuite leave output files in place, which helps much when debugging failures (although it's not a perfect solution for test cases like those verified at different optimisation levels where the output filename is reused and consequently subsequent outputs overwrite earlier ones; something to improve perhaps). Unfortunately the presence of output files confuses some test cases and makes them fail; arguably a test case bug. None of the offending test cases are directly related to RISC-V development, so I just ignore the presence of these failures and only focus on regressions and progressions between testsuite runs. Here are fresh results with the testsuite output tree made tidy: === gcc Summary === # of expected passes 194602 # of unexpected failures 145 # of unexpected successes 11 # of expected failures 1631 # of unresolved testcases 120 # of unsupported tests 3828 It probably makes no sense to clutter the mailing list with my FAIL and UNRESOLVED results; I can send them off-list if you find them useful. Maciej
