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.


Reply via email to