[COMMITTED] CRIS: Adjust gcc.dg/tree-ssa/loop-1.c
Checks
Context |
Check |
Description |
linaro-tcwg-bot/tcwg_gcc_build--master-arm |
success
|
Build passed
|
linaro-tcwg-bot/tcwg_gcc_build--master-aarch64 |
warning
|
Patch is already merged
|
linaro-tcwg-bot/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm |
success
|
Test passed
|
Commit Message
Committed.
-- >8 --
With r15-1619-g3b9b8d6cfdf593, there's a XPASS and a FAIL
for this test-case for cris-elf. Looking at the generated
code, _foo is indeed no longer saved in a register for CRIS.
While that looks like a regression, coremark results are the
same around this revision, so simply adjust the test-case:
remove the target-specific exceptions for cris-*-*.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/loop-1.c: Remove target-specific test
and xfail to adjust for recent changes in register allocation.
---
gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/loop-1.c | 5 ++---
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
Comments
> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp@axis.com>
> Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2024 05:06:43 +0200
> With r15-1619-g3b9b8d6cfdf593, there's a XPASS and a FAIL
> for this test-case for cris-elf. Looking at the generated
> code, _foo is indeed no longer saved in a register for CRIS.
> While that looks like a regression, coremark results are the
> same around this revision, so simply adjust the test-case:
> remove the target-specific exceptions for cris-*-*.
Oh my... That "sameness" was due to fumblefingers on my
part. Sorry about that. There is indeed a performance
regression at "-O2 -march=v10" for cris-elf for coremark.
Not a big one; going from 5179918 to 5181696 cycles gets me
0.034%, but still. Maybe there are other targets affected
negatively by r15-1619-g3b9b8d6cfdf593, so I opened PR115932
to keep track.
brgds, H-P
@@ -43,16 +43,15 @@ int xxx(void)
/* The SH targets always use separate instructions to load the address
and to do the actual call - bsr is only generated by link time
relaxation. */
-/* CRIS and MSP430 keep the address in a register. */
+/* MSP430 keeps the address in a register. */
/* m68k sometimes puts the address in a register, depending on CPU and PIC. */
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "foo" 5 { xfail hppa*-*-* ia64*-*-* sh*-*-* cris-*-* fido-*-* m68k-*-* i?86-*-mingw* i?86-*-cygwin* x86_64-*-mingw* visium-*-* nvptx*-*-* pdp11*-*-* msp430-*-* amdgcn*-*-* } } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "foo" 5 { xfail hppa*-*-* ia64*-*-* sh*-*-* fido-*-* m68k-*-* i?86-*-mingw* i?86-*-cygwin* x86_64-*-mingw* visium-*-* nvptx*-*-* pdp11*-*-* msp430-*-* amdgcn*-*-* } } } */
/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "foo,%r" 5 { target hppa*-*-* } } } */
/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "= foo" 5 { target ia64*-*-* } } } */
/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "call\[ \t\]*_foo" 5 { target i?86-*-mingw* i?86-*-cygwin* } } } */
/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "call\[ \t\]*foo" 5 { target x86_64-*-mingw* } } } */
/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "jsr|bsrf|blink\ttr?,r18" 5 { target sh*-*-* } } } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "Jsr \\\$r" 5 { target cris-*-* } } } */
/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "\[jb\]sr" 5 { target fido-*-* m68k-*-* pdp11-*-* } } } */
/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "bra *tr,r\[1-9\]*,r21" 5 { target visium-*-* } } } */
/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "(?n)\[ \t\]call\[ \t\].*\[ \t\]foo," 5 { target nvptx*-*-* } } } */