Hi Sudi,
On 16/11/17 16:37, Sudi Das wrote:
Hi
This patch fixes the test case armv8_2-fp16-move-1.c for
arm-none-linux-gnueabihf where 2 of the scan-assembler directives were
failing. We now generate less vmov between core and VFP registers.
Thus changing those directives to reflect that.
Is this ok for trunk?
If yes could someone commit it on my behalf?
Sudi
*** gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog ***
2017-11-16 Sudakshina Das <sudi....@arm.com>
* gcc.target/arm/armv8_2-fp16-move-1.c: Edit vmov scan-assembler
directives.
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/armv8_2-fp16-move-1.c
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/armv8_2-fp16-move-1.c
index bb4e68f..0ed8560 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/armv8_2-fp16-move-1.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/armv8_2-fp16-move-1.c
@@ -101,8 +101,8 @@ test_select_8 (__fp16 a, __fp16 b, __fp16 c)
/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {vselgt\.f16\ts[0-9]+, s[0-9]+, s[0-9]+}
1 } } */
/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {vselge\.f16\ts[0-9]+, s[0-9]+, s[0-9]+}
1 } } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {vmov\.f16\ts[0-9]+, r[0-9]+} 4 } } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {vmov\.f16\tr[0-9]+, s[0-9]+} 4 } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {vmov\.f16\ts[0-9]+, r[0-9]+} 2 } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {vmov\ts[0-9]+, s[0-9]+} 4 } } */
Some of the moves between core and fp registers were the result of inefficient codegen and in hindsight
scanning for them was not very useful. Now that we emit only the required ones
I think scanning for the plain
vmovs between two S-registers doesn't test anything useful.
So can you please just remove the second scan-assembler directive here?
Thanks,
Kyrill
