Committed: fix more testsuite fallout from "cost model patch".

2013-10-17 Thread Hans-Peter Nilsson
For cris-elf (no SIMD), the following tests regressed just as for the similar tests mentioned in PR58556. These apparently don't fail for the targets mentioned there for some reason, but I see in the mail thread with the quoted subject there was no conscious adjustment to the test-suite. Thus I b

Re: cost model patch

2013-10-01 Thread Richard Biener
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > On 01/10/13 09:28, Richard Biener wrote: >> >> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 5:26 PM, Xinliang David Li >> wrote: >>> >>> Yes, that will do. Can you do it for me? I can't do testing easily >>> on arm myself. >> >> It also fails on x86_64 with -

Re: cost model patch

2013-10-01 Thread Kyrill Tkachov
On 01/10/13 09:28, Richard Biener wrote: On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 5:26 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote: Yes, that will do. Can you do it for me? I can't do testing easily on arm myself. It also fails on x86_64 with -m32. I always test on x86_64 with multilibs enabled: make -k -j12 check RUNTEST

Re: cost model patch

2013-10-01 Thread Richard Biener
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 5:26 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote: > Yes, that will do. Can you do it for me? I can't do testing easily > on arm myself. It also fails on x86_64 with -m32. I always test on x86_64 with multilibs enabled: make -k -j12 check RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=unix/\{,-m32\}" R

Re: cost model patch

2013-09-30 Thread Xinliang David Li
Yes, that will do. Can you do it for me? I can't do testing easily on arm myself. thanks, David On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 3:29 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > Hi Richard, David, > >> In principle yes. Note that it changes the behavior of -O2 >> -ftree-vectorize >> as -ftree-vectorize does not i

Re: cost model patch

2013-09-30 Thread Kyrill Tkachov
Hi Richard, David, In principle yes. Note that it changes the behavior of -O2 -ftree-vectorize as -ftree-vectorize does not imply changing the default cost model. I am fine with that, but eventually this will have some testsuite fallout. Indeed I am observing a regression with this patch on ar

Re: cost model patch

2013-09-27 Thread Xinliang David Li
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 1:10 AM, Xinliang David Li >> wrote: >>> I took the liberty to pick up Richard's original fvect-cost-model >>> patch and made some modification. >>> >>> What has not changed: >>> 1) option -ftree-vect-loop-version is remove

Re: cost model patch

2013-09-26 Thread Xinliang David Li
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 7:37 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 1:10 AM, Xinliang David Li wrote: >> I took the liberty to pick up Richard's original fvect-cost-model >> patch and made some modification. >> >> What has not changed: >>

Re: cost model patch

2013-09-26 Thread Richard Biener
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 1:10 AM, Xinliang David Li wrote: > I took the liberty to pick up Richard's original fvect-cost-model > patch and made some modification. > > What has not changed: > 1) option -ftree-vect-loop-version is removed; > 2) three cost models are introduc

cost model patch

2013-09-25 Thread Xinliang David Li
I took the liberty to pick up Richard's original fvect-cost-model patch and made some modification. What has not changed: 1) option -ftree-vect-loop-version is removed; 2) three cost models are introduced: cheap, dynamic, and unlimited; 3) unless explicitly specified, cheap model is the de