https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
--- Comment #13 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Fri Jan 18 18:01:56 2019
New Revision: 268083
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268083=gcc=rev
Log:
rs6000: Fix *movsi_from_df (PR88892)
The memory store instructions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
--- Comment #11 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Good point. So we cannot use stfs (etc.) as float_truncate+store ever, not
even with full fast math options.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
--- Comment #10 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
Use of stfs on a double-precision value without frsp first is worse than
simply using the wrong rounding mode; in the case of overflow it does a
bitwise defined operation which is pretty
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #8)
> So we should use the current rounding mode for any float_trunc? So we can
> use
> float store instructions for it only with some fast-math option?
No, the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
--- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool ---
So we should use the current rounding mode for any float_trunc? So we can use
float store instructions for it only with some fast-math option?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64le-redhat-linux-gn |powerpc64*-*-*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
--- Comment #6 from Florian Weimer ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #5)
> This is one of the reasons -Wfloat-conversion exists:
>
> $ gcc -c -Wall -Wextra -Wfloat-conversion -Wdouble-promotion
> -Wunsuffixed-float-constants
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
--- Comment #4 from Florian Weimer ---
Eh, forget what I wrote. The pattern *is* used. r253210 looks definitely to
blame.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
--- Comment #3 from Florian Weimer ---
Started with r253210. I don't think the new pattern is used in this case, so
maybe this is a pre-existing latent bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88892
Florian Weimer changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
14 matches
Mail list logo
