On 12/20/19 9:35 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> Something automated to verify what we implement is what we have documented
> would be neat to have. Maybe this becomes feasible with the rewrite of
> the builtin stuff :-)
Agreed!
>> This passed bootstrap and regression testing with no errors. Ok for trunk?
>
> On what kind of system did you test?
>
> I'd like to see this tested on both BE and LE, and various processor
> generations -- but we'll see if it regresses anyway, and it is still
> stage 3. So, okay for trunk, just please keep an eye out for
> regressions (in January that is :-) )
It was an LE test. I fixed up the problems below and have kicked off
a BE run now and will run the testsuite in both 32-bit and 64-bit modes.
I leave on vacation tomorrow, so I'll wait until I return next week
before committing so I can watch for any regressions.
>> * config/rs6000/rs6000-builtin.def (VAND, VANDC, VNOR, VOR,
>> VXOR): Delete.
>
> You can end a changelog line in a colon just fine, fwiw.
Ok.
>> --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr92923-1.c (nonexistent)
>> +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr92923-1.c (working copy)
>> @@ -0,0 +1,454 @@
>> +/* { dg-do compile { target { powerpc*-*-* } } } */
>
> You don't need this target clause, everything in gc.target/powerpc has it
> already.
>
>> +/* { dg-skip-if "" { powerpc*-*-darwin* } } */
>
> I'm not sure if this is necessary, or just cargo culting :-)
I think maybe both of those were cut/paste issues. I've removed them both.
>> +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR" 0 "gimple" } } */
>
> That's scan-tree-dump-not.
Ahh, that is better. Fixed.
> Same comments for the p8 test of course. Okay with or without those
> adjusted (they aren't wrong, just weird style).
Fixed too.
Peter
