On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Christophe Lyon <christophe.l...@linaro.org> wrote: > On 30 October 2015 at 15:33, Ramana Radhakrishnan > <ramana.radhakrish...@foss.arm.com> wrote: >> >> >> On 29/10/15 17:23, Jim Wilson wrote: >>> I noticed a comment typo in this file while using grep to look for >>> other stuff. The typo is easy to fix. >>> >>> I tried running neon-testgen.ml to verify, but it is apparently no >>> longer valid ocaml, as it doesn't work with the ocamlc 4.01.0 I have >>> on Ubuntu 14.04. I get a syntax error. Someone who knows ocaml will >>> have to fix this. Meanwhile, the patch to fix the typo should still >>> be OK, as this is a separate problem. >>> >>> Jim >>> >> >> This is OK. >> >> I'd really like neon-testgen.ml and the tests in gcc.target/arm/neon to be >> removed if all the intrinsics are now tested from Christophe's work in >> getting his advsimd tests integrated. Where are we on that ? >> > > The tests I added cover all ARMv7 intrinsics. I have converted all my tests.
Good and thank you for doing that. > > There were a few additions to support some aarch64 specific intrinsics. > > However, most of the tests in gcc.target/arm/neon contain scan-asm > directives which mine don't. > My tests do check functionality (they are executable, comparing their > results against expected values). I don't think the scan-asm in those tests gives you anything useful at O0 with undefined behaviour in the testcases. In any case for the more esoteric intrinsics (i.e. the ones that do saturation etc..) having the run time tests is a better test. I do not see this as being useful any more in terms of the testing coverage this provides. A patch to remove neon-testgen.ml and the tests in gcc.target/arm/neon is pre-approved. regards Ramana > > Christophe. > >> regards >> Ramana
