diff mbox

[ARM] Fix for testcase after r228661

Message ID 56266336.7020701@arm.com
State New
Headers show

Commit Message

Andre Vieira (lists) Oct. 20, 2015, 3:52 p.m. UTC
Hi,

This patch addresses PR-67948 by changing the xor-and.c test, initially 
written for a simplify-rtx pattern, to make it pass post r228661 (see 
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg00676.html). This test no 
longer triggered the simplify-rtx pattern it was written for prior to 
r228661, though other optimizations did lead to the same assembly the 
test checked for. The optimization added with r228661 matches the 
pattern used in the test and optimizes it to a better and still valid 
sequence. Being unable to easily change the test to trigger the original 
simplify-rtx pattern, I chose to change it to pass with the new produced 
assembly sequence.

This is correct because the transformation is valid and it yields a more 
efficient pattern. However, as I pointed out before this test doesn't 
test the optimization it originally was intended for.

Tested by running regression tests for armv6.

Is this OK to commit?

Thanks,
Andre

Comments

Ramana Radhakrishnan Oct. 20, 2015, 4:25 p.m. UTC | #1
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Andre Vieira
<Andre.SimoesDiasVieira@arm.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patch addresses PR-67948 by changing the xor-and.c test, initially
> written for a simplify-rtx pattern, to make it pass post r228661 (see
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg00676.html). This test no
> longer triggered the simplify-rtx pattern it was written for prior to
> r228661, though other optimizations did lead to the same assembly the test
> checked for. The optimization added with r228661 matches the pattern used in
> the test and optimizes it to a better and still valid sequence. Being unable
> to easily change the test to trigger the original simplify-rtx pattern, I
> chose to change it to pass with the new produced assembly sequence.
>
> This is correct because the transformation is valid and it yields a more
> efficient pattern. However, as I pointed out before this test doesn't test
> the optimization it originally was intended for.
>
> Tested by running regression tests for armv6.
>
> Is this OK to commit?
>

Missing Changelog - please remember to put the PR number in the
Changelog in the correct format i.e PR testsuite/67948. Ok with that.

I suspect that the simplify-rtx.c is much less likely to trigger given
your match.pd change, but it will be fun proving that.

regards
ramana


> Thanks,
> Andre
diff mbox

Patch

From 89922547118e716b41ddf6edefb274322193f25c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Andre Simoes Dias Vieira <andsim01@arm.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 12:48:26 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Fix for xor-and.c test

---
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/xor-and.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/xor-and.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/xor-and.c
index 53dff85f8f780fb99a93bbcc24180a3d0d5d3be9..3715530cd7bf9ad8abb24cb21cd51ae3802079e8 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/xor-and.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/xor-and.c
@@ -10,6 +10,6 @@  unsigned short foo (unsigned short x)
   return x;
 }
 
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "orr" } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "eor" } } */
 /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "mvn" } } */
 /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "uxth" } } */
-- 
1.9.1