https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96373
--- Comment #19 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e11513c7688f583d1f4d0961d79d8aa775add03d
commit r12-9384-ge11513c7688f583d1f4d0961d79d8aa775add03d
Author: Richard San
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96373
--- Comment #18 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Kewen Lin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cf3d95cce379f3260ad27264de0398e2ed1db2ea
commit r11-10549-gcf3d95cce379f3260ad27264de0398e2ed1db2ea
Author: Kewen Lin
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96373
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Kewen Lin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cea4b90f8305df681d322315a9c30e3924e1e79d
commit r12-9206-gcea4b90f8305df681d322315a9c30e3924e1e79d
Author: Kewen Lin
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96373
--- Comment #16 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b9c78605039f839f3c79ad8fca4f60ea9a5654ed
commit r13-5979-gb9c78605039f839f3c79ad8fca4f60ea9a5654ed
Author: Richard Sandiford
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96373
--- Comment #15 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Kewen Lin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4f5a1198065dc078f8099db628da7b06a2666f34
commit r13-5978-g4f5a1198065dc078f8099db628da7b06a2666f34
Author: Kewen Lin
Date: Mon Feb 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96373
--- Comment #14 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7486fe153adaa868f36248b72f3e78d18b1b3ba1
commit r13-5458-g7486fe153adaa868f36248b72f3e78d18b1b3ba1
Author: Richard Sandiford
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96373
--- Comment #13 from Andrew Pinski ---
vect__1.9_40 = .MASK_LOAD (_13, 64B, loop_mask_39);
_15 = &MEM [(double *)s_9(D) + ivtmp_48 * 8];
vect__2.12_43 = .MASK_LOAD (_15, 64B, loop_mask_39);
vect__3.13_44 = vect__1.9_40 / vect__2.12_43;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96373
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||evatux at gmail dot com
--- Comment #12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96373
--- Comment #11 from Michael Matz ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #9)
> How do we represent sNaNs with -fnon-call-exceptions? That is,
I think we're currently simply buggy at various stages as soon as sNaNs are
involved _and_ ST
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96373
--- Comment #10 from Michael Matz ---
(In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #5)
> > Just note that _all_ floating point operations, not just divisions, can trap
> > (without fast-math). You never know if the user enabled stops for any of
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96373
--- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 5 Aug 2020, rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96373
>
> --- Comment #8 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
> ---
> (In reply to rguent...@su
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96373
--- Comment #8 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #7)
> On Wed, 5 Aug 2020, rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96373
> >
> > --- Comment #6 from r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96373
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 5 Aug 2020, rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96373
>
> --- Comment #6 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
> ---
> FWIW, I think the reason
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96373
--- Comment #6 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
FWIW, I think the reason I mentioned for skimping on this originally
was that we don't e.g. prevent if-conversion of:
void
foo (int *c, float *f)
{
for (int i = 0; i < 16; ++i)
f[i] = c[
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96373
--- Comment #5 from Andreas Schwab ---
> Just note that _all_ floating point operations, not just divisions, can trap
> (without fast-math). You never know if the user enabled stops for any of
> the FP exceptions (overflow, underflow, inexact, i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96373
--- Comment #4 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> (In reply to rsand...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #1)
> > I could have sworn there was a reason why we didn't do this,
> > on the basis that we alrea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96373
--- Comment #3 from Michael Matz ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> which means for non-memory gimple_could_trap_p (stmt) - sth you can
> easily check I guess.
Just note that _all_ floating point operations, not just divisions, c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96373
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to rsand...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #1)
> I could have sworn there was a reason why we didn't do this,
> on the basis that we already failed to take FP exceptions into
> account when vectorising n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96373
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirme
19 matches
Mail list logo
