On 11/19/24 1:30 AM, pan2...@intel.com wrote:
From: Pan Li <pan2...@intel.com>

The testcases of vector strided load/store are designed to pick up
different sorts of optimization options but actually these option
are ignored according to the Execution log of gcc.log.  This patch
would like to make it correct, and then you will see the build option
similar as below from the gcc.log.

Executing ... strided_ld_st-1-f16.c -O3 -mrvv-vector-bits=scalable 
-mrvv-max-lmul=m1 ...
Executing ... strided_ld_st-1-f16.c -O3 -mrvv-vector-bits=zvl -mrvv-max-lmul=m1 
...
Executing ... strided_ld_st-1-f16.c -O3 -mrvv-vector-bits=scalable 
-mrvv-max-lmul=m4 ...
Executing ... strided_ld_st-1-f16.c -O3 -mrvv-vector-bits=scalable 
-mrvv-max-lmul=m8 ...
Executing ... strided_ld_st-1-f16.c -O3 -mrvv-vector-bits=zvl 
-mrvv-max-lmul=dynamic ...
Executing ... strided_ld_st-1-f16.c -O3 -mrvv-vector-bits=zvl -mrvv-max-lmul=m8 
...
Executing ... strided_ld_st-1-f16.c -O3 -mrvv-vector-bits=zvl -mrvv-max-lmul=m4 
...
Executing ... strided_ld_st-1-f16.c -O3 -mrvv-vector-bits=scalable 
-mrvv-max-lmul=m2 ...
Executing ... strided_ld_st-1-f16.c -O3 -mrvv-vector-bits=scalable 
-mrvv-max-lmul=dynamic ...
Executing ... strided_ld_st-1-f16.c -O3 -mrvv-vector-bits=zvl -mrvv-max-lmul=m2 
...

The below test suites are passed for this patch.
* The rv64gcv fully regression test.

It is test only patch and obvious up to a point, will commit it
directly if no comments in next 48H.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

        * gcc.target/riscv/rvv/rvv.exp: Fix the incorrect optimization options.
So if this change is the right one to make for the strided subdirectory, then shouldn't it also be correct to make for the gather-scatter subdirectory as well?

And similarly for various other instances where we call dg-runtest in that file.

Basically I'd like to see some explanation why this is the right patch to make and why this case needs to be handled different from every other one that I see in that file. Assuming that explanation makes sense, then some kind of comment i this file indicating why this case is different seems in order.

jeff

Reply via email to