The following patch fixes a problem that resulted in incorrect code generation
for the CPU2017 benchmark 525.x264_r. The fix correctly checks the "dest"
operand, which is the memory operand.
Bootstrap/regtest on powerp64le and powerpc64 (-m32/-m64) with no new
regressions. Ok for trunk?
-Pat
2018-05-17 Pat Haugen <pthau...@us.ibm.com>
Segher Boessenkool <seg...@kernel.crashing.org>
PR target/85698
* config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_output_move_128bit): Check dest
operand.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2018-05-17 Pat Haugen <pthau...@us.ibm.com>
PR target/85698
* gcc.target/powerpc/pr85698.c: New test.
Index: gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c (revision 260267)
+++ gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c (working copy)
@@ -20234,7 +20234,7 @@ rs6000_output_move_128bit (rtx operands[
}
else if (TARGET_ALTIVEC && src_vmx_p
- && altivec_indexed_or_indirect_operand (src, mode))
+ && altivec_indexed_or_indirect_operand (dest, mode))
return "stvx %1,%y0";
else if (TARGET_VSX && src_vsx_p)
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr85698.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr85698.c (nonexistent)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr85698.c (working copy)
@@ -0,0 +1,79 @@
+/* { dg-do run } */
+/* { dg-require-effective-target vsx_hw } */
+/* { dg-skip-if "do not override -mcpu" { powerpc*-*-* } { "-mcpu=*" } {
"-mcpu=power7" } } */
+/* { dg-options "-O3 -mcpu=power7" } */
+
+/* PR85698: Incorrect code generated on LE due to use of stxvw4x. */
+
+typedef unsigned char uint8_t;
+typedef short int16_t;
+extern void abort (void);
+extern int memcmp(const void *, const void *, __SIZE_TYPE__);
+
+uint8_t expected[128] =
+{14, 0, 4, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21,
+ 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 28, 35, 33, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40,
+ 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59,
+ 60, 61, 62, 63, 66, 63, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78,
+ 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 97, 96,
+ 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113,
+ 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127};
+
+static uint8_t x264_clip_uint8( int x )
+{
+ return x&(~255) ? (-x)>>31 : x;
+}
+void add4x4_idct( uint8_t *p_dst, int16_t dct[16])
+{
+ int16_t d[16];
+ int16_t tmp[16];
+ int i, y, x;
+ for( i = 0; i < 4; i++ )
+ {
+ int s02 = dct[0*4+i] + dct[2*4+i];
+ int d02 = dct[0*4+i] - dct[2*4+i];
+ int s13 = dct[1*4+i] + (dct[3*4+i]>>1);
+ int d13 = (dct[1*4+i]>>1) - dct[3*4+i];
+ tmp[i*4+0] = s02 + s13;
+ tmp[i*4+1] = d02 + d13;
+ tmp[i*4+2] = d02 - d13;
+ tmp[i*4+3] = s02 - s13;
+ }
+ for( i = 0; i < 4; i++ )
+ {
+ int s02 = tmp[0*4+i] + tmp[2*4+i];
+ int d02 = tmp[0*4+i] - tmp[2*4+i];
+ int s13 = tmp[1*4+i] + (tmp[3*4+i]>>1);
+ int d13 = (tmp[1*4+i]>>1) - tmp[3*4+i];
+ d[0*4+i] = ( s02 + s13 + 32 ) >> 6;
+ d[1*4+i] = ( d02 + d13 + 32 ) >> 6;
+ d[2*4+i] = ( d02 - d13 + 32 ) >> 6;
+ d[3*4+i] = ( s02 - s13 + 32 ) >> 6;
+ }
+ for( y = 0; y < 4; y++ )
+ {
+ for( x = 0; x < 4; x++ )
+ p_dst[x] = x264_clip_uint8( p_dst[x] + d[y*4+x] );
+ p_dst += 32;
+ }
+}
+
+int main()
+{
+ uint8_t dst[128];
+ int16_t dct[16];
+ int i;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < 16; i++)
+ dct[i] = i*10 + i;
+ for (i = 0; i < 128; i++)
+ dst[i] = i;
+
+ add4x4_idct(dst, dct);
+
+ if (memcmp (dst, expected, 128))
+ abort();
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
