diff mbox series

RISC-V Regression: Fix FAIL of pr65947-8.c for RVV

Message ID 20231010125547.3682032-1-juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai
State Accepted
Headers
Series RISC-V Regression: Fix FAIL of pr65947-8.c for RVV |

Checks

Context Check Description
snail/gcc-patch-check success Github commit url

Commit Message

juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai Oct. 10, 2023, 12:55 p.m. UTC 
  This test is testing fold_extract_last pattern so it's more reasonable use
vect_fold_extract_last instead of specifying targets.

This is the vect_fold_extract_last property:
proc check_effective_target_vect_fold_extract_last { } {
    return [expr { [check_effective_target_aarch64_sve]
		   || [istarget amdgcn*-*-*]
		   || [check_effective_target_riscv_v] }]
}

include ARM SVE/GCN/RVV.

It perfectly matches what we want and more reasonable, better maintainment.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

	* gcc.dg/vect/pr65947-8.c: Use vect_fold_extract_last.

---
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr65947-8.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Comments

Jeff Law Oct. 10, 2023, 1:24 p.m. UTC | #1 
On 10/10/23 06:55, Juzhe-Zhong wrote:
> This test is testing fold_extract_last pattern so it's more reasonable use
> vect_fold_extract_last instead of specifying targets.
> 
> This is the vect_fold_extract_last property:
> proc check_effective_target_vect_fold_extract_last { } {
>      return [expr { [check_effective_target_aarch64_sve]
> 		   || [istarget amdgcn*-*-*]
> 		   || [check_effective_target_riscv_v] }]
> }
> 
> include ARM SVE/GCN/RVV.
> 
> It perfectly matches what we want and more reasonable, better maintainment.
> 
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
> 
> 	* gcc.dg/vect/pr65947-8.c: Use vect_fold_extract_last.
OK
jeff
Li, Pan2 Oct. 10, 2023, 1:28 p.m. UTC | #2 
Committed, thanks Jeff.

Pan

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com> 
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 9:24 PM
To: Juzhe-Zhong <juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai>; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: rguenther@suse.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RISC-V Regression: Fix FAIL of pr65947-8.c for RVV



On 10/10/23 06:55, Juzhe-Zhong wrote:
> This test is testing fold_extract_last pattern so it's more reasonable use
> vect_fold_extract_last instead of specifying targets.
> 
> This is the vect_fold_extract_last property:
> proc check_effective_target_vect_fold_extract_last { } {
>      return [expr { [check_effective_target_aarch64_sve]
> 		   || [istarget amdgcn*-*-*]
> 		   || [check_effective_target_riscv_v] }]
> }
> 
> include ARM SVE/GCN/RVV.
> 
> It perfectly matches what we want and more reasonable, better maintainment.
> 
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
> 
> 	* gcc.dg/vect/pr65947-8.c: Use vect_fold_extract_last.
OK
jeff
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr65947-8.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr65947-8.c
index d0426792e35..9ced4dbb69f 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr65947-8.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr65947-8.c
@@ -41,6 +41,6 @@  main (void)
   return 0;
 }
 
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-not "LOOP VECTORIZED" "vect" { target { ! { amdgcn*-*-* || aarch64_sve } } } } } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump "LOOP VECTORIZED" "vect" { target { amdgcn*-*-* || aarch64_sve } } } } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump "multiple types in double reduction or condition reduction" "vect" { target { ! { amdgcn*-*-* || aarch64_sve } } } } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-not "LOOP VECTORIZED" "vect" { target { ! { vect_fold_extract_last } } } } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump "LOOP VECTORIZED" "vect" { target { vect_fold_extract_last } } } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump "multiple types in double reduction or condition reduction" "vect" { target { ! { vect_fold_extract_last } } } } } */