On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 04:46:46PM -0400, Michael Meissner wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 04:22:06PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/ppc-ne0-1.c
> > > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/ppc-ne0-1.c
> >
> > > -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "addic" 4 } } */
> > > -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "subfe" 1 } } */
> > > -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "addze" 3 } } */
> > > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\maddic\M} 4 { target { !
> > > has_arch_pwr10 } } } } */
> > > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\msubfe\M} 1 { target { !
> > > has_arch_pwr10 } } } } */
> > > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\maddic\M} 3 { target {
> > > has_arch_pwr10 } } } } */
> > > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not {\msubfe\M} { target {
> > > has_arch_pwr10 } } } } */
> > > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\msetbcr\M} 1 { target {
> > > has_arch_pwr10 } } } } */
> > > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\maddze\M} 3 } } */
> >
> > It may be easier to split the patch into two, where one part can get the
> > setbcr (the first, simplest function), and the rest stays the same.
>
> I really don't understand this comment. I don't see how you could split the
> patch in two, as the function that generates the setbcr (ne0) for power10
> would
> generate addic/subfe instead of the setbcr on earlier power systems. Those
> instruction counts have to be changed for the other functions. So it doesn't
> make sense to split the patch to me.
I'm sorry. I meant split the *testcase* into two :-) One with the
first test, the other with the rest.
Segher
