Re: [PATCH, rs6000] PR87532: Bad results from vec_extract (unsigned char, foo) dependent upon function inline

2019-04-09 Thread Segher Boessenkool
Hi Kelvin, On Tue, Apr 09, 2019 at 08:15:31AM -0500, Kelvin Nilsen wrote: > This new patch addresses the code generation problems that were uncovered by > these failing tests. Additionally, this new patch corrects some of the > expected instruction counts for certain previously existing

[PATCH, rs6000] PR87532: Bad results from vec_extract (unsigned char, foo) dependent upon function inline

2019-04-09 Thread Kelvin Nilsen
A patch to address this problem report was committed on 3/15/2019. Some of the new regressions tests submitted with that initial patch failed on P8 big-endian and on P9 little-endian. This new patch addresses the code generation problems that were uncovered by these failing tests.

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] PR87532: Bad Results from vec_extract(unsigned char, foo) dependent upon function inline

2019-03-08 Thread Segher Boessenkool
Hi Kelvin, On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 10:59:35AM -0600, Kelvin Nilsen wrote: > This problem report, though initially motivated by differences in behavior > between constant and non-constant selector arguments, uncovered a number of > inconsistencies in the implementation of vec_extract. > > This

[PATCH, rs6000] PR87532: Bad Results from vec_extract(unsigned char, foo) dependent upon function inline

2019-03-08 Thread Kelvin Nilsen
This problem report, though initially motivated by differences in behavior between constant and non-constant selector arguments, uncovered a number of inconsistencies in the implementation of vec_extract. This patch provides several fixes to make handling of constant selector expressions the