| Message ID | 20241031182605.3072159-1-torbjorn.svensson@foss.st.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | testsuite: arm: Use effective-target for pr68620 and pr78041 tests | expand |
On 31/10/2024 18:26, Torbjörn SVENSSON wrote: > Ok for trunk and releases/gcc-14? > > -- > > Tests uses neon, so add effective-target arm_neon. > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > > * gcc.target/arm/pr68620.c: Use effective-target arm_neon. > * gcc.target/arm/pr78041.c: Likewise. > > Signed-off-by: Torbjörn SVENSSON <torbjorn.svensson@foss.st.com> > --- > gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr68620.c | 4 ++-- > gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr78041.c | 3 ++- > 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr68620.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr68620.c > index 91878432b00..b4a44dab6ba 100644 > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr68620.c > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr68620.c > @@ -1,8 +1,8 @@ > /* { dg-do compile } */ > /* { dg-skip-if "-mpure-code supports M-profile without Neon only" { *-*-* } { "-mpure-code" } } */ > -/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_fp_ok } */ > +/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_neon_ok } */ This seems reasonable, but ... > /* { dg-options "-mfp16-format=ieee" } */ > -/* { dg-add-options arm_fp } */ > +/* { dg-add-options arm_neon } */ > > #include "arm_neon.h" > ... I don't think this is right. It looks like the point of this test is to check that adding the #pragma to select a neon-based FPU enables a specific intrinsic. That ought to work with the existing checks (at least, modulo changing the effective-target at the start). But adding neon options on the command line shouldn't be needed. What's the option combination that leads to a failure? > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr78041.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr78041.c > index 340ab5cb433..418b7e09fc4 100644 > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr78041.c > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr78041.c > @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@ > /* { dg-require-effective-target arm_thumb2_ok } */ > /* { dg-require-effective-target arm_neon_ok } */ > -/* { dg-options "-fno-inline -mthumb -O1 -mfpu=neon -w" } */ > +/* { dg-options "-fno-inline -mthumb -O1 -w" } */ > +/* { dg-add-options arm_neon } */ > > extern void abort (void); This bit is OK, though. >
On 2024-11-04 17:03, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: > On 31/10/2024 18:26, Torbjörn SVENSSON wrote: >> Ok for trunk and releases/gcc-14? >> >> -- >> >> Tests uses neon, so add effective-target arm_neon. >> >> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: >> >> * gcc.target/arm/pr68620.c: Use effective-target arm_neon. >> * gcc.target/arm/pr78041.c: Likewise. >> >> Signed-off-by: Torbjörn SVENSSON <torbjorn.svensson@foss.st.com> >> --- >> gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr68620.c | 4 ++-- >> gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr78041.c | 3 ++- >> 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr68620.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr68620.c >> index 91878432b00..b4a44dab6ba 100644 >> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr68620.c >> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr68620.c >> @@ -1,8 +1,8 @@ >> /* { dg-do compile } */ >> /* { dg-skip-if "-mpure-code supports M-profile without Neon only" { *-*-* } { "-mpure-code" } } */ >> -/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_fp_ok } */ >> +/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_neon_ok } */ > > This seems reasonable, but ... > >> /* { dg-options "-mfp16-format=ieee" } */ >> -/* { dg-add-options arm_fp } */ >> +/* { dg-add-options arm_neon } */ >> >> #include "arm_neon.h" >> > > ... I don't think this is right. It looks like the point of this test is to check that adding the #pragma to select a neon-based FPU enables a specific intrinsic. That ought to work with the existing checks (at least, modulo changing the effective-target at the start). But adding neon options on the command line shouldn't be needed. What's the option combination that leads to a failure? The arm_fp is not enough to ensure a valid architecture is in use. If I do not switch from arm_fp to arm_neon, I get the test executed like this for m85hard: .../bin/arm-none-eabi-gcc .../gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr68620.c -mthumb -march=armv8.1-m.main+mve -mcpu=cortex-m55 -mfloat-abi=hard -mfpu=fpv5-d16 -fdiagnostics-plain-output -mfp16-format=ieee -S -o pr68620.s Obvious, -mfp16-format=ieee is valid for Cortex-M85, but it's not the same thing as that it supports neon/nenon-fp16. The check for arm_neon passes as there are flags that could be added that override and makes the check pass, i.e.: .../bin/arm-none-eabi-gcc -mthumb -march=armv8.1-m.main+mve -mcpu=cortex-m55 -mfloat-abi=hard -mfpu=fpv5-d16 -fdiagnostics-plain-output -mfpu=neon -mfloat-abi=softfp -mcpu=unset -march=armv7-a -Wno-complain-wrong-lang -c -o arm_neon_ok16723.o arm_neon_ok16723.c Note: I get this when I am adding -mcpu=unset to the arm_neon_ok check. If I do not add the -mcpu=unset, the test is marked as unsupported due to a conflicting -march/-mcpu combination (this is what I'm trying to fix in the patchset that I will share in a few days, but without a dedicated fix, these tests will be listed as regressions). So, in order for the test to pass, a compatible architecture must be selected and if we are not going to use the arm_neon check, then what should we us to get as wide coverage as possible? Kind regards, Torbjörn
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr68620.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr68620.c index 91878432b00..b4a44dab6ba 100644 --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr68620.c +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr68620.c @@ -1,8 +1,8 @@ /* { dg-do compile } */ /* { dg-skip-if "-mpure-code supports M-profile without Neon only" { *-*-* } { "-mpure-code" } } */ -/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_fp_ok } */ +/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_neon_ok } */ /* { dg-options "-mfp16-format=ieee" } */ -/* { dg-add-options arm_fp } */ +/* { dg-add-options arm_neon } */ #include "arm_neon.h" diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr78041.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr78041.c index 340ab5cb433..418b7e09fc4 100644 --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr78041.c +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr78041.c @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@ /* { dg-require-effective-target arm_thumb2_ok } */ /* { dg-require-effective-target arm_neon_ok } */ -/* { dg-options "-fno-inline -mthumb -O1 -mfpu=neon -w" } */ +/* { dg-options "-fno-inline -mthumb -O1 -w" } */ +/* { dg-add-options arm_neon } */ extern void abort (void);
Ok for trunk and releases/gcc-14? -- Tests uses neon, so add effective-target arm_neon. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gcc.target/arm/pr68620.c: Use effective-target arm_neon. * gcc.target/arm/pr78041.c: Likewise. Signed-off-by: Torbjörn SVENSSON <torbjorn.svensson@foss.st.com> --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr68620.c | 4 ++-- gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr78041.c | 3 ++- 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)