On 09/01/2018 12:04 PM, Tom de Vries wrote: > On 08/31/2018 04:14 PM, Cesar Philippidis wrote:
>> Is this patch OK for trunk? >> > > Well, how did you test this ( > https://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html#patches : "Bootstrapping and > testing. State the host and target combinations you used to do proper > testing as described above, and the results of your testing.") ? I tested the standalone nvptx compiler. I'll retest with libgomp with -misa=sm_35. Bootstrapping won't help much here, unfortunately. >> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/nvptx/atomic_fetch-1.c >> @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@ >> +/* Test the nvptx atomic instructions for __atomic_fetch_OP for SM_35 >> + targets. */ >> + >> +/* { dg-do compile } */ >> +/* { dg-options "-O2 -misa=sm_35" } */ >> + >> +int >> +main() >> +{ >> + unsigned long long a = ~0; >> + unsigned b = 0xa; >> + >> + __atomic_fetch_add (&a, b, 0); >> + __atomic_fetch_and (&a, b, 0); >> + __atomic_fetch_or (&a, b, 0); >> + __atomic_fetch_xor (&a, b, 0); >> + >> + return a; >> +} >> + >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "atom.add.u64" } } */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "atom.b64.and" } } */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "atom.b64.or" } } */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "atom.b64.xor" } } */ >> -- 2.17.1 >> > > Hmm, the add.u64 vs b64.and looks odd (and the scan-assembler-not > testcase does not use this difference, so that needs to be fixed, or for > bonus points, changed into a scan-assembler testcase). > > The documentation uses "op.type", we should fix the compiler to emit > that consistently. Separate patch that fixes that pre-approved. ACK. I think there are a lot of other cases like that in the BE. > This is ok (with, as I mentioned above, the SI part split off into a > separate patch), on the condition that you test libgomp with > -foffload=-misa=sm_35. Thanks, Cesar
