This is an archive of the discontinued LLVM Phabricator instance.

[X86] Re-organize tests for bypassing slow division (NFC)
ClosedPublic

Authored by n.bozhenov on Dec 31 2016, 6:50 AM.

Details

Summary

For tests on bypassing slow division there's no need to be
Atom-specific. The patch renames all tests on division bypassing,
makes their names more consistent and differentiates the purpose
of each test file:

atom-bypass-slow-division.ll -> bypass-slow-division-32.ll
(tests verifying correctness of divl-to-divb bypassing)

atom-bypass-slow-division-64.ll -> bypass-slow-division-64.ll
(tests verifying correctness of divq-to-divl bypassing)

slow-div.ll -> bypass-slow-division-tune.ll
(tests verifying that bypassing is enabled only when appropriate)

Diff Detail

Repository
rL LLVM

Event Timeline

n.bozhenov updated this revision to Diff 82764.Dec 31 2016, 6:50 AM
n.bozhenov retitled this revision from to [X86] Re-organize tests for bypassing slow division (NFC).
n.bozhenov updated this object.
jlebar edited edge metadata.Dec 31 2016, 10:27 AM

It might be good if, when you land this, you try to do so in a way that gets SVN to recognize the file renames. But I guess no matter what you do, git will recognize the renames, which is good.

This patch is part of a larger patch set:

  1. D28196
  2. D28197
  3. D28198
  4. D28199
  5. D28200

FYI you can put this information into phab if you so desire, see "edit related revisions".

jlebar accepted this revision.Dec 31 2016, 10:27 AM
jlebar edited edge metadata.

It might be good if, when you land this, you try to do so in a way that gets SVN to recognize the file renames. But I guess no matter what you do, git will recognize the renames, which is good.

This patch is part of a larger patch set:

  1. D28196
  2. D28197
  3. D28198
  4. D28199
  5. D28200

FYI you can put this information into phab if you so desire, see "edit related revisions".

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Dec 31 2016, 10:27 AM

lgtm on the assumption that these are just renames -- I didn't check that they are.

on the assumption that these are just renames

That's not true. There are changes beside renaming. I will create an auxiliary review without renaming so that one can easily review the actual diff between old and new files.

on the assumption that these are just renames

That's not true. There are changes beside renaming. I will create an auxiliary review without renaming so that one can easily review the actual diff between old and new files.

I don't think another review is necessary - just commit the renames only first and then make the changes in the now renamed files in a follow up commit. Make sense?

RKSimon edited edge metadata.Jan 8 2017, 4:22 AM

Are you waiting on D28196 before committing these renames + changes?

FYI you can put this information into phab if you so desire, see "edit related revisions".

Thanks! I overlooked this feature.

on the assumption that these are just renames

That's not true. There are changes beside renaming. I will create an auxiliary review without renaming so that one can easily review the actual diff between old and new files.

I don't think another review is necessary - just commit the renames only first and then make the changes in the now renamed files in a follow up commit. Make sense?

Makes sense. Let it be a renaming commit. The actual modifications are moved into D28551.

Are you waiting on D28196 before committing these renames + changes?

Yes, I'd like to commit these changes together with D28196 and D28198.

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
llvm/trunk/test/CodeGen/X86/bypass-slow-division-tune.ll