On 2/13/18 4:34 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: >> This patch passed bootstrap and retesting on powerpc64le-linux with >> no regressions. Ok for mainline? > > Okay, thanks! Does this need backports?
Committed with your suggested change below. Thanks! It'd be easy to backport and should be fairly harmless. That said, I was never able to create a simpler test case, using __builtin_altivec_lvx() that would end up being re-recog'd as vsx_movv4si_64, so the only way I know we can hit this is with Kelvin's optimization that replaces aligned vsx loads/stores with altivec loads/stores and that optimization is only on trunk. It's up to you whether you want the backport because you don't trust me being able to create a failing test case. :-) >> --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr84279.C (nonexistent) >> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr84279.C (working copy) >> @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@ >> +/* { dg-do compile { target { powerpc*-*-* && lp64 } } } */ > > I don't think this needs lp64? Yeah, I think you're right. I'll remove it. Thanks. Peter