On 7 July 2014 11:29, Christophe Lyon <christophe.l...@linaro.org> wrote: > On 3 July 2014 10:34, Tom de Vries <tom_devr...@mentor.com> wrote: >> On 03-07-14 10:20, Marcus Shawcroft wrote: >>> >>> On 2 July 2014 09:02, Tom de Vries <tom_devr...@mentor.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 02-07-14 08:23, Marc Glisse wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> In the first example you gave, looking at the pattern (no match_dup, >>>>> setting the >>>>> full register), it seems that it may have wanted "=&" instead of "+&". >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> [ move discussion from gcc ml to gcc-patches ml ] >>>> >>>> Marcus, >>>> >>>> The +& constraint on operand 0 of vec_unpack_trunc_<mode> seems wrong, >>>> since >>>> the template does not use the operand as input. >>>> >>>> This patch fixes that. >>>> >>>> OK for trunk if aarch64 build & regtest succeeds ? >>> >>> >>> Your patch looks fine, operand 0 isn't used for input. OK assuming no >>> regression. Did you find this by inspection or is this the cause of >>> some bug? >>> >> >> Marcus, >> >> I found this by inspection: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2014-07/msg00007.html >> . >> >> Thanks, >> - Tom >> > > Hi, > > This patch causes gcc.target/aarch64/vmlsq_laneq.c to FAIL on > aarch64_be-none-elf. > > Christophe.
... which was fixed by James' commit 212298 Sorry for the noise Christophe.