On 2021/9/15 21:11, David Edelsohn wrote:
Hi, Xionhu
Should "altivec_vsel2" .. 3 .. 4 be "*altivec_vsel2", etc.
because they are combiner patterns and never referenced by name? Only
the first, named pattern is referenced by the builtin code.
Thanks, updated the patchset with Segher's
Hi, Xionhu
Should "altivec_vsel2" .. 3 .. 4 be "*altivec_vsel2", etc.
because they are combiner patterns and never referenced by name? Only
the first, named pattern is referenced by the builtin code.
Other than that question / suggestion, this patch is okay. Please
coordinate with Bill and his
Ping^3, thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-May/570333.html
On 2021/9/6 08:52, Xionghu Luo via Gcc-patches wrote:
Ping^2, thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-May/570333.html
On 2021/6/30 09:42, Xionghu Luo via Gcc-patches wrote:
Gentle ping, thanks.
