Hi Tamar,
On 29 November 2016 at 10:50, Tamar Christina <tamar.christ...@arm.com> wrote: > Hi All, > > The new patch contains the proper types for the intrinsics that should be > returning uint64x1 > and has the rest of the comments by Christophe in them. > LGTM. One more question: maybe we want to add explicit tests for vdup*_v_p64 even though they are aliases for vmov? Christophe > Kind Regards, > Tamar > > ________________________________________ > From: Tamar Christina > Sent: Friday, November 25, 2016 4:01:30 PM > To: Christophe Lyon > Cc: GCC Patches; christophe.l...@st.com; Marcus Shawcroft; Richard Earnshaw; > James Greenhalgh; Kyrylo Tkachov; nd > Subject: RE: [AArch64][ARM][GCC][PATCHv2 3/3] Add tests for missing Poly64_t > intrinsics to GCC > > > >> > A few comments about this new version: >> > * arm-neon-ref.h: why do you create >> CHECK_RESULTS_NAMED_NO_FP16_NO_POLY64? >> > Can't you just add calls to CHECK_CRYPTO in the existing >> > CHECK_RESULTS_NAMED_NO_FP16? > > Yes, that should be fine, I didn't used to have CHECK_CRYPTO before and when > I added it > I didn't remove the split. I'll do it now. > >> > >> > * p64_p128: >> > From what I can see ARM and AArch64 differ on the vceq variants >> > available with poly64. >> > For ARM, arm_neon.h contains: uint64x1_t vceq_p64 (poly64x1_t __a, >> > poly64x1_t __b) For AArch64, I can't see vceq_p64 in arm_neon.h? ... >> > Actually I've just noticed the other you submitted while I was writing >> > this, where you add vceq_p64 for aarch64, but it still returns >> > uint64_t. >> > Why do you change the vceq_64 test to return poly64_t instead of >> uint64_t? > > This patch is slightly outdated. The correct type is `uint64_t` but when it > was noticed > This patch was already sent. New one coming soon. > >> > >> > Why do you add #ifdef __aarch64 before vldX_p64 tests and until vsli_p64? >> > > > This is wrong, remove them. It was supposed to be around the vldX_lane_p64 > tests. > >> > The comment /* vget_lane_p64 tests. */ is wrong before VLDX_LANE >> > tests >> > >> > You need to protect the new vmov, vget_high and vget_lane tests with >> > #ifdef __aarch64__. >> > > > vget_lane is already in an #ifdef, vmov you're right, but I also notice that > the > test calls VDUP instead of VMOV, which explains why I didn't get a test > failure. > > Thanks for the feedback, > I'll get these updated. > >> >> Actually, vget_high_p64 exists on arm, so no need for the #fidef for it. >> >> >> > Christophe >> > >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Tamar >> >> ________________________________________ >> >> From: Tamar Christina >> >> Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2016 11:58:46 AM >> >> To: Christophe Lyon >> >> Cc: GCC Patches; christophe.l...@st.com; Marcus Shawcroft; Richard >> >> Earnshaw; James Greenhalgh; Kyrylo Tkachov; nd >> >> Subject: RE: [AArch64][ARM][GCC][PATCHv2 3/3] Add tests for missing >> >> Poly64_t intrinsics to GCC >> >> >> >> Hi Christophe, >> >> >> >> Thanks for the review! >> >> >> >>> >> >>> A while ago I added p64_p128.c, to contain all the poly64/128 tests >> >>> except for vreinterpret. >> >>> Why do you need to create p64.c ? >> >> >> >> I originally created it because I had a much smaller set of >> >> intrinsics that I wanted to add initially, this grew and It hadn't >> >> occurred to >> me that I can use the existing file now. >> >> >> >> Another reason was the effective-target arm_crypto_ok as you >> mentioned below. >> >> >> >>> >> >>> Similarly, adding tests for vcreate_p64 etc... in p64.c or >> >>> p64_p128.c might be easier to maintain than adding them to vcreate.c >> >>> etc with several #ifdef conditions. >> >> >> >> Fair enough, I'll move them to p64_p128.c. >> >> >> >>> For vdup-vmod.c, why do you add the "&& defined(__aarch64__)" >> >>> condition? These intrinsics are defined in arm/arm_neon.h, right? >> >>> They are tested in p64_p128.c >> >> >> >> I should have looked for them, they weren't being tested before so I >> >> had Mistakenly assumed that they weren't available. Now I realize I >> >> just need To add the proper test option to the file to enable crypto. I'll >> update this as well. >> >> >> >>> Looking at your patch, it seems some tests are currently missing for arm: >> >>> vget_high_p64. I'm not sure why I missed it when I removed neont- >> >>> testgen... >> >> >> >> I'll adjust the test conditions so they run for ARM as well. >> >> >> >>> >> >>> Regarding vreinterpret_p128.c, doesn't the existing effective-target >> >>> arm_crypto_ok prevent the tests from running on aarch64? >> >> >> >> Yes they do, I was comparing the output against a clean version and >> >> hasn't noticed That they weren't running. Thanks! >> >> >> >>> >> >>> Thanks, >> >>> >> >>> Christophe
