https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87064
--- Comment #29 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Mon Feb 4 16:48:30 2019
New Revision: 268524
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268524=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-02-04 Bill Schmidt
PR target/87064
Backport from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87064
--- Comment #28 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Mon Feb 4 16:47:12 2019
New Revision: 268523
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268523=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-02-04 Bill Schmidt
PR target/87064
Backport from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87064
--- Comment #27 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Wed Jan 30 20:52:08 2019
New Revision: 268403
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268403=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-01-30 Bill Schmidt
PR target/87064
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87064
--- Comment #26 from Bill Schmidt ---
I believe it's also incorrect (the assumption on the value being in element 3
is a big-endian statement) but latent because this is really hard to match.
I'll take an internal note to clean this up. I will
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87064
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87064
--- Comment #24 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jan 22 22:27:32 2019
New Revision: 268164
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268164=gcc=rev
Log:
PR target/87064
* config/rs6000/vsx.md (*vsx_reduc__v2df_scalar):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87064
--- Comment #23 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 45496
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45496=edit
gcc9-pr87064.patch
Patch I've so far tested on powerpc64le-linux only, where it fixed
FAIL:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87064
--- Comment #22 from Bill Schmidt ---
(I'll test with both disabled for LE and report results.)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87064
--- Comment #21 from Bill Schmidt ---
We should probably disable the _v4sf_scalar one for LE also, as this seems to
be doing a similar trick for V4SF.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87064
--- Comment #20 from Bill Schmidt ---
Oh, sorry, I missed that in all the commentary. I had looked at the code and
seen the "obvious" problem in the expansion, and noted you had suggested that
also. Should have read further.
I think that's
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87064
--- Comment #19 from Segher Boessenkool ---
The pattern makes no sense at all for LE.
If LE,
(vec_concat:V2DF
(vec_select:DF
(match_operand:V2DF 1 "vfloat_operand" "wd,wa,wd,wa")
(parallel [(const_int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87064
--- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The comment on the define_insn_and_split says:
;; Combiner patterns with the vector reduction patterns that knows we can get
;; to the top element of the V2DF array without doing an extract.
So, the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87064
--- Comment #17 from Bill Schmidt ---
Actually I *think* the *vsx_reduc__v4sf_scalar code is probably
okay. This is all being done with insns that should leave the reduction result
in the right-hand element of the register (element 3 for BE, as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87064
--- Comment #16 from Bill Schmidt ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #13)
> So, both the following patches should fix it IMHO, but no idea which one if
> any is right.
> With
> --- gcc/config/rs6000/vsx.md.jj 2019-01-01
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87064
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87064
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
And, if I disable that define_insn_and_split altogether (add 0 && to the
condition), the assembly change is:
--- reduction-3.s2 2019-01-18 18:19:42.184057246 +0100
+++ reduction-3.s4 2019-01-18
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87064
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So, both the following patches should fix it IMHO, but no idea which one if any
is right.
With
--- gcc/config/rs6000/vsx.md.jj 2019-01-01 12:37:44.305529527 +0100
+++ gcc/config/rs6000/vsx.md2019-01-18
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87064
--- Comment #12 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Yes, I think so (just the vec_select arg?)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87064
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dje at gcc dot gnu.org,
19 matches
Mail list logo
