[Bug target/106907] gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc:23155: strange expression ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106907 Jeevitha changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED --- Comment #11 from Jeevitha --- Fixed
[Bug target/106907] gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc:23155: strange expression ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106907 --- Comment #10 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by jeevitha : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:36a52cdc23383e51359630e566b62fa62011428d commit r14-5006-g36a52cdc23383e51359630e566b62fa62011428d Author: Jeevitha Date: Mon Oct 30 04:07:07 2023 -0500 rs6000: Change bitwise xor to an equality operator [PR106907] PR106907 has a few warnings spotted from cppcheck. These warnings are related to the need of precedence clarification. Instead of using xor, it has been changed to equality check, which achieves the same result. Additionally, comment indentation has been fixed. 2023-10-11 Jeevitha Palanisamy gcc/ PR target/106907 * config/rs6000/rs6000.cc (altivec_expand_vec_perm_const): Change bitwise xor to an equality and fix comment indentation.
[Bug target/106907] gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc:23155: strange expression ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106907 --- Comment #9 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by jeevitha : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1669fad496ed6cc7ddea142e12af15e0b9f7f3b4 commit r14-2336-g1669fad496ed6cc7ddea142e12af15e0b9f7f3b4 Author: Jeevitha Palanisamy Date: Wed Jul 5 23:46:15 2023 -0500 rs6000: Remove redundant initialization [PR106907] PR106907 has few warnings spotted from cppcheck. In that addressing redundant initialization issue. Here the initialized value of 'new_addr' was overwritten before it was read. Updated the source by removing the unnecessary initialization of 'new_addr'. 2023-07-06 Jeevitha Palanisamy gcc/ PR target/106907 * config/rs6000/rs6000.cc (rs6000_expand_vector_extract): Remove redundant initialization of new_addr.
[Bug target/106907] gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc:23155: strange expression ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106907 Jeevitha changed: What|Removed |Added CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #8 from Jeevitha --- Static analyser cppcheck says: gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc:7668:16: style: Redundant initialization for 'new_addr'. The initialized value is overwritten before it is read. [redundantInitialization] new_addr = gen_rtx_PLUS (Pmode, XEXP (mem, 0), elt); ^ rs6000.cc:7663:20: note: new_addr is initialized rtx new_addr = gen_reg_rtx (Pmode); ^ rs6000.cc:7668:16: note: new_addr is overwritten new_addr = gen_rtx_PLUS (Pmode, XEXP (mem, 0), elt); ^ In above issue new_addr was initialized at line no : 7663 which was overwritten before it reads at line no : 7668
[Bug target/106907] gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc:23155: strange expression ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106907 --- Comment #7 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by jeevitha : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3b09a5453114fee10b0f0984793ce968503dbea7 commit r12-9689-g3b09a5453114fee10b0f0984793ce968503dbea7 Author: Jeevitha Palanisamy Date: Tue Jun 6 06:19:02 2023 -0500 rs6000: Remove duplicate expression [PR106907] PR106907 has few warnings spotted from cppcheck. In that addressing duplicate expression issue here. Here the same expression is used twice in logical AND(&&) operation which result in same result so removing that. 2023-06-06 Jeevitha Palanisamy gcc/ PR target/106907 * config/rs6000/rs6000.cc (vec_const_128bit_to_bytes): Remove duplicate expression. (cherry picked from commit c4deccd44655c5d748dfed200a37f2b678c32fe8)
[Bug target/106907] gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc:23155: strange expression ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106907 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by jeevitha : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dda4745eb1c9b063c6004baef54aa4cec97edf3d commit r13-7426-gdda4745eb1c9b063c6004baef54aa4cec97edf3d Author: Jeevitha Palanisamy Date: Tue Jun 6 06:19:02 2023 -0500 rs6000: Remove duplicate expression [PR106907] PR106907 has few warnings spotted from cppcheck. In that addressing duplicate expression issue here. Here the same expression is used twice in logical AND(&&) operation which result in same result so removing that. 2023-06-06 Jeevitha Palanisamy gcc/ PR target/106907 * config/rs6000/rs6000.cc (vec_const_128bit_to_bytes): Remove duplicate expression. (cherry picked from commit c4deccd44655c5d748dfed200a37f2b678c32fe8)
[Bug target/106907] gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc:23155: strange expression ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106907 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by jeevitha : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c4deccd44655c5d748dfed200a37f2b678c32fe8 commit r14-1567-gc4deccd44655c5d748dfed200a37f2b678c32fe8 Author: Jeevitha Palanisamy Date: Tue Jun 6 06:19:02 2023 -0500 rs6000: Remove duplicate expression [PR106907] PR106907 has few warnings spotted from cppcheck. In that addressing duplicate expression issue here. Here the same expression is used twice in logical AND(&&) operation which result in same result so removing that. 2023-06-06 Jeevitha Palanisamy gcc/ PR target/106907 * config/rs6000/rs6000.cc (vec_const_128bit_to_bytes): Remove duplicate expression.
[Bug target/106907] gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc:23155: strange expression ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106907 Jeevitha changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jeevitha at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4 from Jeevitha --- (In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #3) > Should probably be written as swapped != !BYTES_BIG_ENDIAN. I bootstrapped and regtest there is no regression with this change.
[Bug target/106907] gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc:23155: strange expression ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106907 --- Comment #3 from Andreas Schwab --- Should probably be written as swapped != !BYTES_BIG_ENDIAN.
[Bug target/106907] gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc:23155: strange expression ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106907 --- Comment #2 from David Binderman --- In the same file rs6000.cc, cppcheck produces: gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc:28477:8: style: Same expression on both sides of '&&'. [duplicateExpression] Source code is info->all_words_same = (info->words[0] == info->words[1] && info->words[0] == info->words[1] && info->words[0] == info->words[2] && info->words[0] == info->words[3]);
[Bug target/106907] gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc:23155: strange expression ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106907 --- Comment #1 from David Binderman --- Wrong source code. It should be: if (swapped ^ !BYTES_BIG_ENDIAN && icode != CODE_FOR_vsx_xxpermdi_v16qi) That looks like it could benefit from some ( and ). The source code I did mention produces this message: gcc/config/gcn/gcn.cc:5563:5: style: Clarify calculation precedence for '&' and '?'. [clarifyCalculation] So two bugs reports in one.
