On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 01:11:58PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 08:22:40PM -0400, Michael Meissner wrote:
> >
> > * gcc.target/powerpc/float128-minmax.c: Adjust expected code for
> > power10.
> > * lib/target-supports.exp (check_effective_target_has_arch_pwr10):
> > New target support.
> > ---
> > gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/float128-minmax.c | 8 +++++---
> > gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp | 10 ++++++++++
> > 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/float128-minmax.c
> > b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/float128-minmax.c
> > index fe397518f2f..a7d3a3a0b3e 100644
> > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/float128-minmax.c
> > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/float128-minmax.c
> > @@ -1,6 +1,5 @@
> > -/* { dg-do compile { target lp64 } } */
>
> Does that work? Why was it there before?
The lp64 eliminates 32-bit, which does not support hardware IEEE 128-bit due to
the lack of TImode. The test was written before the ppc_float128_hw test. Now
that we have ppc_float128_hw, we don't need an explicit lp64.
> > /* { dg-require-effective-target powerpc_p9vector_ok } */
> > -/* { dg-require-effective-target float128 } */
> > +/* { dg-require-effective-target ppc_float128_hw } */
>
> Why is it okay to no longer run this test where it ran before?
The ppc_float128_hw test is a more precise test than just float128 and power9.
For 64-bit, it doesn't matter, but it allows us to drop the lp64 test.
> > -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler {\mxscmpuqp\M} } } */
> > +/* Adjust code power10 which has native min/max instructions. */
> > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler {\mxscmpuqp\M} { target { !
> > has_arch_pwr10 } } } } */
>
> You need scan-assembler-times here? (Not that it had that before this
> patch, of course).
>
> > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler {\mxsmincqp\M} { target {
> > has_arch_pwr10 } } } } */
> > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler {\mxsmaxcqp\M} { target {
> > has_arch_pwr10 } } } } */
>
> You can write just { target has_arch_pwr10 } here, I think? Please do
> so (if that works, I haven't actually tested it :-) )
>
>
> Segher
--
Michael Meissner, IBM
IBM, M/S 2506R, 550 King Street, Littleton, MA 01460-6245, USA
email: meiss...@linux.ibm.com, phone: +1 (978) 899-4797
