Re: [PATCH] vect, omp: inbranch simdclone dropping const

2023-09-27 Thread Richard Biener
On Wed, 27 Sep 2023, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: > > > On 26/09/2023 17:37, Andrew Stubbs wrote: > > I don't have authority to approve anything, but here's a review anyway. > > > > Thanks for working on this. > > Thank you for reviewing and apologies for the mess of a patch, may have rushed >

Re: [PATCH] vect, omp: inbranch simdclone dropping const

2023-09-27 Thread Andrew Stubbs
On 27/09/2023 08:56, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: On 26/09/2023 17:37, Andrew Stubbs wrote: I don't have authority to approve anything, but here's a review anyway. Thanks for working on this. Thank you for reviewing and apologies for the mess of a patch, may have rushed it ;) diff --git

Re: [PATCH] vect, omp: inbranch simdclone dropping const

2023-09-27 Thread Andre Vieira (lists)
On 26/09/2023 17:37, Andrew Stubbs wrote: I don't have authority to approve anything, but here's a review anyway. Thanks for working on this. Thank you for reviewing and apologies for the mess of a patch, may have rushed it ;) diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-simd-clone-19.c

Re: [PATCH] vect, omp: inbranch simdclone dropping const

2023-09-26 Thread Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
On 26 September 2023 23:02:10 CEST, "Andre Vieira (lists)" wrote: > > >On 26/09/2023 21:26, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: >> On 26 September 2023 18:46:11 CEST, Tobias Burnus >> wrote: >>> On 26.09.23 18:37, Andrew Stubbs wrote: If the fall-through is deliberate please add a /*

Re: [PATCH] vect, omp: inbranch simdclone dropping const

2023-09-26 Thread Andre Vieira (lists)
On 26/09/2023 21:26, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: On 26 September 2023 18:46:11 CEST, Tobias Burnus wrote: On 26.09.23 18:37, Andrew Stubbs wrote: If the fall-through is deliberate please add a /* FALLTHROUGH */ comment (or whatever spelling disables the warning). It's:

Re: [PATCH] vect, omp: inbranch simdclone dropping const

2023-09-26 Thread Andre Vieira (lists)
On 26/09/2023 17:48, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 05:24:26PM +0100, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: @@ -5816,6 +5817,18 @@ get_references_in_stmt (gimple *stmt, vec *references) } case IFN_MASK_LOAD: case IFN_MASK_STORE: + case

Re: [PATCH] vect, omp: inbranch simdclone dropping const

2023-09-26 Thread Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
On 26 September 2023 18:46:11 CEST, Tobias Burnus wrote: >On 26.09.23 18:37, Andrew Stubbs wrote: >> If the fall-through is deliberate please add a /* FALLTHROUGH */ >> comment (or whatever spelling disables the warning). > >It's: gcc_fallthrough (); > >Which gets converted to

Re: [PATCH] vect, omp: inbranch simdclone dropping const

2023-09-26 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 05:24:26PM +0100, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: > @@ -5816,6 +5817,18 @@ get_references_in_stmt (gimple *stmt, > vec *references) > } > case IFN_MASK_LOAD: > case IFN_MASK_STORE: > + case IFN_MASK_CALL: > + { > + tree

Re: [PATCH] vect, omp: inbranch simdclone dropping const

2023-09-26 Thread Tobias Burnus
On 26.09.23 18:37, Andrew Stubbs wrote: If the fall-through is deliberate please add a /* FALLTHROUGH */ comment (or whatever spelling disables the warning). It's: gcc_fallthrough (); Which gets converted to "__attribute__((fallthrough))"; it could also expand to "[[fallthrough]]" but that's

Re: [PATCH] vect, omp: inbranch simdclone dropping const

2023-09-26 Thread Andrew Stubbs
I don't have authority to approve anything, but here's a review anyway. Thanks for working on this. On 26/09/2023 17:24, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: The const attribute is ignored when simdclone's are used inbranch. This is due to the fact that when analyzing a MASK_CALL we were not looking