Hi, Richard,
Accidentally, the first version of the patch (which contained changes
in the original files without duplicating them, and which was approved
by Ira Rosen) has already been checked-in to trunk - could you also
approve reverting the original tests back? With this revert I'll also
commit the last version of the patch.

Michael

On 7 December 2011 16:08, Richard Guenther <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Michael Zolotukhin
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Thanks, Richard.
>> Should somebody else approve the patch or is it ok for commit to trunk?
>
> It's ok to commit.
>
> Richard.
>
>> On 5 December 2011 18:04, Richard Guenther <[email protected]> 
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Michael Zolotukhin
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> I'd just duplicate the tests you want to change to a larger array
>>>>> size and change those duplicates accordingly, leaving the original
>>>>> tests alone.
>>>> Richard, I made the tests this way - please check them in the attached
>>>> patch (it happened to be quite big).
>>>
>>> Works for me.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Richard.
>>>
>>>>> There is vect_multiple_sizes for such cases.
>>>> Ira, thanks! This flag would be useful to avoid fails on the original
>>>> tests when they are compiled with mavx/mavx2 - I'll prepare a patch
>>>> for this soon.
>>>>
>>>> On 5 December 2011 13:10, Richard Guenther <[email protected]> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Ira Rosen <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [email protected] wrote on 05/12/2011 10:39:07 AM:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> From: Michael Zolotukhin <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> To: Richard Guenther <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> Cc: [email protected], [email protected]
>>>>>>> Date: 05/12/2011 10:39 AM
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Patch] Increase array sizes in vect-tests to enable
>>>>>>> 256-bit vectorization
>>>>>>> Sent by: [email protected]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 5 December 2011 10:14, Michael Zolotukhin
>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>> > Ok, will several tests with short arrays be enough for that or should
>>>>>>> > we keep all the original tests plus new ones with longer arrays?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BTW, there is another problem with current tests with short arrays -
>>>>>>> scans are expecting specific number of some diagnostic messages like
>>>>>>> "not vectorized: unsupported unaligned store", and that number would
>>>>>>> be different if several vector-lengths are available - so we'll have
>>>>>>> fails in those tests.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is vect_multiple_sizes for such cases.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd just duplicate the tests you want to change to a larger array
>>>>> size and change those duplicates accordingly, leaving the original
>>>>> tests alone.
>>>>>
>>>>> Richard.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> ---
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Michael V. Zolotukhin,
>>>> Software Engineer
>>>> Intel Corporation.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ---
>> Best regards,
>> Michael V. Zolotukhin,
>> Software Engineer
>> Intel Corporation.

-- 
---
Best regards,
Michael V. Zolotukhin,
Software Engineer
Intel Corporation.

Reply via email to