[Bug target/71805] incorrect code for test pr45752.c with -mcpu=power9

2016-08-01 Thread acsawdey at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71805 --- Comment #8 from acsawdey at gcc dot gnu.org --- *** Bug 71722 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug target/71805] incorrect code for test pr45752.c with -mcpu=power9

2016-07-13 Thread wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71805 --- Comment #7 from Bill Schmidt --- *** Bug 71731 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug target/71805] incorrect code for test pr45752.c with -mcpu=power9

2016-07-12 Thread meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71805 Michael Meissner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/71805] incorrect code for test pr45752.c with -mcpu=power9

2016-07-12 Thread meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71805 --- Comment #5 from Michael Meissner --- Author: meissner Date: Tue Jul 12 18:12:11 2016 New Revision: 238258 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238258=gcc=rev Log: Backport from mainline [gcc] 2016-07-12 Michael Meissner

[Bug target/71805] incorrect code for test pr45752.c with -mcpu=power9

2016-07-12 Thread meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71805 --- Comment #4 from Michael Meissner --- Author: meissner Date: Tue Jul 12 17:42:04 2016 New Revision: 238256 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238256=gcc=rev Log: [gcc] 2016-07-12 Michael Meissner PR

[Bug target/71805] incorrect code for test pr45752.c with -mcpu=power9

2016-07-11 Thread meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71805 --- Comment #3 from Michael Meissner --- Created attachment 38878 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38878=edit Proposed patch to fix the problem

[Bug target/71805] incorrect code for test pr45752.c with -mcpu=power9

2016-07-11 Thread meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71805 --- Comment #2 from Michael Meissner --- It turns out, when I implemented the xxperm variant (and when Kelvin used my code to add xxpermr) I mis-read the ISA 3.0 manual. I thought: xxperm a,b,c was equivalent to: vperm a,a,b,c when

[Bug target/71805] incorrect code for test pr45752.c with -mcpu=power9

2016-07-11 Thread meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71805 Michael Meissner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|