On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 9:16 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 03, 2016 at 08:56:44AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.fortran/pr71734-1.f90
>> @@ -0,0 +1,110 @@
>> +! { dg-do run { target avx_runtime } }
>> +! { dg-additional-options "-msse2" }
>> +! T
On Sun, Jul 03, 2016 at 08:56:44AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.fortran/pr71734-1.f90
> @@ -0,0 +1,110 @@
> +! { dg-do run { target avx_runtime } }
> +! { dg-additional-options "-msse2" }
> +! The same as simd3.f90, but compiled with -msse2. we run it onl
On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 2:31 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 7:51 AM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
>> Richard,
>>
>> Could you please review additional simple fix for 70729 - we need to
>> nullify safelen field of loops containing simduid intrinsics like
>> GOMP_SIMD_LANE (introduced e.g.
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 7:51 AM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Richard,
>
> Could you please review additional simple fix for 70729 - we need to
> nullify safelen field of loops containing simduid intrinsics like
> GOMP_SIMD_LANE (introduced e.g. for private variables). I checked
> that this fix cures
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 4:51 PM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Richard,
>
> Could you please review additional simple fix for 70729 - we need to
> nullify safelen field of loops containing simduid intrinsics like
> GOMP_SIMD_LANE (introduced e.g. for private variables). I checked
> that this fix cures
Richard,
Could you please review additional simple fix for 70729 - we need to
nullify safelen field of loops containing simduid intrinsics like
GOMP_SIMD_LANE (introduced e.g. for private variables). I checked
that this fix cures regression which was missed by me since AVX2
machine is required fo
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 04:25:16PM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 16:48:25 +0300, Yuri Rumyantsev
> wrote:
> > Thanks for your help.
> > Could you please look at the following simple patch which cures
> > regression - we need to nullify loop safelen field in
> > adj
Hi!
On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 16:48:25 +0300, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Thanks for your help.
> Could you please look at the following simple patch which cures
> regression - we need to nullify loop safelen field in
> adjust_simduid_builtins:
>
> diff --git a/gcc/tree-vectorizer.c b/gcc/tree-vectorize
Hi Jacub,
Thanks for your help.
Could you please look at the following simple patch which cures
regression - we need to nullify loop safelen field in
adjust_simduid_builtins:
diff --git a/gcc/tree-vectorizer.c b/gcc/tree-vectorizer.c
index 2669813..f70380c 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-vectorizer.c
+++
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 03:16:51PM +0300, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Hi Grüße.
>
> Could you please tell me how to reproduce your regression - did not
> see any new failures in my local area:
>
> PASS: libgomp.fortran/examples-4/simd-2.f90 -O0 (test for excess errors)
> PASS: libgomp.fortran/exa
Hi Grüße.
Could you please tell me how to reproduce your regression - did not
see any new failures in my local area:
PASS: libgomp.fortran/examples-4/simd-2.f90 -O0 (test for excess errors)
PASS: libgomp.fortran/examples-4/simd-2.f90 -O0 execution test
PASS: libgomp.fortran/examples-4/simd-
Hi!
On Tue, 28 Jun 2016 18:50:37 +0300, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Here is the second part of patch to improve loop invariant code motion
> for loop marked with pragma omp simd.
>
> Bootstrapping and regression testing did not show any new failures.
That got committed in r237844. In my testing,
On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 5:50 PM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Hi All!
>
> Here is the second part of patch to improve loop invariant code motion
> for loop marked with pragma omp simd.
>
> Bootstrapping and regression testing did not show any new failures.
> Is it OK for trunk?
Ok.
Thanks,
Richard.
13 matches
Mail list logo
