Hi Segher,
Thanks for your suggestions!
>> + for (unsigned i = 0; i < and_insns.length (); ++i)
>
> "i++" is used more often, is more traditional.
>
Updated.
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr97019.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,82 @@
>> +/* This issue can only exist on little-endian P8 targets, since
>> + the built-in functions vec_ld/vec_st will use lxvd2x/stxvd2x
>> + (P8 big-endian) or lxv/stxv (P9 and later). */
>> +/* { dg-do compile { target { powerpc_p8vector_ok && le } } } */
>> +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mdejagnu-cpu=power8" } */
>
> Do you need to test for LE? If not, just always run it? If it works,
> it works, it doesn't matter that you do not expect it to ever fail (we
> do not really expect *any* test we have to ever fail *anywhere*, heh).
>
Yes, I did test it on P8 BE, it can generate lxvd2x/stxvd2x on some paths
fed by rldicr ...0,59 which are necessary, but they will make the
not-rldicr testing fail unexpectedly.
>> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "rldicr\[ \t\]+\[0-9\]+,\[0-9\]+,0,59" }
>> } */
>
> Please use {} quotes, and \s and \d.
>
> You can also use {(?n)rldicr.*,0,59} since (?n) makes . not match
> newlines anymore.
Updated with /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not {(?n)rldicr.*,0,59} } } */
Re-tested and committed it in r11-3217. Thanks!
BR,
Kewen
