[Bug target/91275] __builtin_crypto_vpmsumd gives different results -O[123] vs -O0

2019-10-07 Thread wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275 Bill Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED --- Comment #20 from Bill Schmidt

[Bug target/91275] __builtin_crypto_vpmsumd gives different results -O[123] vs -O0

2019-10-07 Thread wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275 Bill Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Known to work|

[Bug target/91275] __builtin_crypto_vpmsumd gives different results -O[123] vs -O0

2019-10-07 Thread wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275 --- Comment #18 from Bill Schmidt --- Author: wschmidt Date: Mon Oct 7 20:50:05 2019 New Revision: 276678 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276678=gcc=rev Log: [gcc] 2019-10-07 Bill Schmidt Backport from mainline

[Bug target/91275] __builtin_crypto_vpmsumd gives different results -O[123] vs -O0

2019-10-07 Thread wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275 --- Comment #17 from Bill Schmidt --- Author: wschmidt Date: Mon Oct 7 19:34:41 2019 New Revision: 276669 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276669=gcc=rev Log: [gcc] 2019-10-07 Bill Schmidt Backport from mainline

[Bug target/91275] __builtin_crypto_vpmsumd gives different results -O[123] vs -O0

2019-10-07 Thread wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275 --- Comment #16 from Bill Schmidt --- Author: wschmidt Date: Mon Oct 7 18:23:20 2019 New Revision: 276667 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276667=gcc=rev Log: [gcc] 2019-10-07 Bill Schmidt Backport from mainline

[Bug target/91275] __builtin_crypto_vpmsumd gives different results -O[123] vs -O0

2019-10-01 Thread wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275 --- Comment #15 from Bill Schmidt --- Excellent! I'm glad you have a workaround for the time being.

[Bug target/91275] __builtin_crypto_vpmsumd gives different results -O[123] vs -O0

2019-10-01 Thread cand at gmx dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275 --- Comment #14 from Lauri Kasanen --- Inline asm works on the buggy versions. Thanks.

[Bug target/91275] __builtin_crypto_vpmsumd gives different results -O[123] vs -O0

2019-10-01 Thread wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275 Bill Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||10.0 Known to fail|

[Bug target/91275] __builtin_crypto_vpmsumd gives different results -O[123] vs -O0

2019-10-01 Thread wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275 --- Comment #12 from Bill Schmidt --- Committed to trunk with 276410. Forgot to annotate the ChangeLog with the PR, so here it is: [gcc] 2019-10-01 Bill Schmidt * config/rs6000/rs6000-p8swap.c (rtx_is_swappable_p): Don't swap

[Bug target/91275] __builtin_crypto_vpmsumd gives different results -O[123] vs -O0

2019-10-01 Thread wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275 --- Comment #11 from Bill Schmidt --- I tested #pragma target -mno-optimize-swaps, and it doesn't help. The only options that can be specified with #pragma target for Power are listed here:

[Bug target/91275] __builtin_crypto_vpmsumd gives different results -O[123] vs -O0

2019-10-01 Thread wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275 --- Comment #10 from Bill Schmidt --- I don't *believe* that "#pragma target" works with -mno-optimize-swaps, but you could try it. I think that mechanism only works for certain flags, but I haven't tried that one. I think inline asm should

[Bug target/91275] __builtin_crypto_vpmsumd gives different results -O[123] vs -O0

2019-10-01 Thread cand at gmx dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275 --- Comment #9 from Lauri Kasanen --- Can -mno-optimize-swaps be used per-function, in the code via some pragma? Alternatively, does calling the instruction via inline asm prevent the swapping?

[Bug target/91275] __builtin_crypto_vpmsumd gives different results -O[123] vs -O0

2019-10-01 Thread segher at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275 --- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool --- (In reply to Lauri Kasanen from comment #7) > Are you sure about the smaller ones? To me they should not care about 64-bit > swaps, "swappable" here means you can swap the low and high half on all

[Bug target/91275] __builtin_crypto_vpmsumd gives different results -O[123] vs -O0

2019-10-01 Thread cand at gmx dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275 --- Comment #7 from Lauri Kasanen --- Thanks for working on this. Per my experience, this is fast for gcc ;) Are you sure about the smaller ones? To me they should not care about 64-bit swaps, but clang lists them all as lane-sensitive:

[Bug target/91275] __builtin_crypto_vpmsumd gives different results -O[123] vs -O0

2019-09-30 Thread wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275 --- Comment #6 from Bill Schmidt --- Thanks for the report! Sorry for taking so long to look at this. Swap optimization treats vpmsumd as swappable, but unlike vpmsumb, vpmsumh, and vpmsumw, it is not. Testing a patch.

[Bug target/91275] __builtin_crypto_vpmsumd gives different results -O[123] vs -O0

2019-09-10 Thread wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275 Bill Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug target/91275] __builtin_crypto_vpmsumd gives different results -O[123] vs -O0

2019-09-07 Thread segher at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275 Segher Boessenkool changed: What|Removed |Added CC||wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug target/91275] __builtin_crypto_vpmsumd gives different results -O[123] vs -O0

2019-09-07 Thread segher at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275 Segher Boessenkool changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/91275] __builtin_crypto_vpmsumd gives different results -O[123] vs -O0

2019-09-07 Thread segher at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275 Segher Boessenkool changed: What|Removed |Added Target|ppc64le |powerpc*-*-* CC|

[Bug target/91275] __builtin_crypto_vpmsumd gives different results -O[123] vs -O0

2019-07-31 Thread cand at gmx dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91275 --- Comment #1 from Lauri Kasanen --- clang 7.0.0 outputs the expected values, aka the gcc -O0 ones, at all optimization levels. (it calls the builtin __builtin_altivec_crypto_vpmsumd, but no other changes)