On 4/27/23 20:21, Die Li wrote:
Two issues have been observed in current riscv_expand_conditional_move
implementation.
1. Before introduction of TARGET_XTHEADCONDMOV, op0 of comparision expression
is used for mode comparision with word_mode, but after TARGET_XTHEADCONDMOV
megered with
On 5/19/23 20:14, Andrew Pinski via Gcc-patches wrote:
Instead of using creating trees to the expansion,
just expand directly which makes the code a little simplier
but also reduces how much GC memory will be used during the expansion.
OK? Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux.
From: Juzhe-Zhong
This patch enable RVV auto-vectorization including floating-point
unorder and order comparison.
The testcases are leveraged from Richard.
So include Richard as co-author.
Co-Authored-By: Richard Sandiford
gcc/ChangeLog:
* config/riscv/autovec.md (vcond): New
On 5/19/23 20:14, Andrew Pinski via Gcc-patches wrote:
Instead of depending on combine to do the extraction,
Let's create a tree which will expand directly into
the extraction. This improves code generation on some
targets.
OK? Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux.
gcc/ChangeLog:
On 5/19/23 20:14, Andrew Pinski via Gcc-patches wrote:
Since we know that fold_single_bit_test is now only passed
NE_EXPR or EQ_EXPR, we can simplify it and just use a gcc_assert
to assert that is the code that is being passed.
OK? Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux.
gcc/ChangeLog:
On 5/19/23 20:14, Andrew Pinski via Gcc-patches wrote:
Now the only use of fold_single_bit_test is in do_store_flag,
we can change it such that to pass the inner arg and bitnum
instead of building a tree. There is no code generation changes
due to this change, only a decrease in GC memory
On 5/19/23 20:14, Andrew Pinski via Gcc-patches wrote:
The code in fold_single_bit_test, checks if
the inner was a right shift and improve the bitnum
based on that. But since the inner will always be a
SSA_NAME at this point, the code is dead. Move it over
to use the helper function
On 5/19/23 20:14, Andrew Pinski via Gcc-patches wrote:
Since the last use of fold_single_bit_test is fold_single_bit_test,
we can inline it and even simplify the inlined version. This has
no behavior change.
OK? Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* expr.cc
On 5/19/23 20:14, Andrew Pinski via Gcc-patches wrote:
Since the last use of fold_single_bit_test is fold_single_bit_test,
we can inline it and even simplify the inlined version. This has
no behavior change.
OK? Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* expr.cc
On 5/19/23 20:14, Andrew Pinski via Gcc-patches wrote:
This is part 1 of N patch set that will change the expansion
of `(A & C) != 0` from using trees to directly expanding so later
on we can do some cost analysis.
Since the only user of fold_single_bit_test is now
expand, move it to there.
On 5/19/23 17:56, pan2...@intel.com wrote:
From: Pan Li
There are 2 local array in function optimize_mode_switching. It will be
initialized conditionally at the beginning but then always consumed in
another loop. It may trigger the warning maybe-uninitialized, and may
result in build
On 5/8/23 08:11, Raphael Moreira Zinsly wrote:
Changes since v1:
- Removed name clash change.
- Fix new pattern indentation.
-- >8 --
When (a & (1 << bit_no)) is tested inside an IF we can use a bit extract.
gcc/ChangeLog:
*
On 5/8/23 08:12, Raphael Moreira Zinsly wrote:
Changes since v1:
- Remove subreg from operand 1.
-- >8 --
We were not able to match the CTZ sign extend pattern on RISC-V
because it gets optimized to zero extend and/or to ANDI patterns.
For the ANDI case, combine scrambles the RTL
Since we know that fold_single_bit_test is now only passed
NE_EXPR or EQ_EXPR, we can simplify it and just use a gcc_assert
to assert that is the code that is being passed.
OK? Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* expr.cc (fold_single_bit_test): Add an assert
Instead of using creating trees to the expansion,
just expand directly which makes the code a little simplier
but also reduces how much GC memory will be used during the expansion.
OK? Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* expr.cc (fold_single_bit_test): Rename to
Now the only use of fold_single_bit_test is in do_store_flag,
we can change it such that to pass the inner arg and bitnum
instead of building a tree. There is no code generation changes
due to this change, only a decrease in GC memory that is produced
during expansion.
OK? Bootstrapped and tested
Instead of depending on combine to do the extraction,
Let's create a tree which will expand directly into
the extraction. This improves code generation on some
targets.
OK? Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* expr.cc (fold_single_bit_test): Use BIT_FIELD_REF
The code in fold_single_bit_test, checks if
the inner was a right shift and improve the bitnum
based on that. But since the inner will always be a
SSA_NAME at this point, the code is dead. Move it over
to use the helper function get_def_for_expr instead.
OK? Bootstrapped and tested on
Since the last use of fold_single_bit_test is fold_single_bit_test,
we can inline it and even simplify the inlined version. This has
no behavior change.
OK? Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* expr.cc (fold_single_bit_test_into_sign_test): Inline into ...
This is part 1 of N patch set that will change the expansion
of `(A & C) != 0` from using trees to directly expanding so later
on we can do some cost analysis.
Since the only user of fold_single_bit_test is now
expand, move it to there.
OK? Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux.
This patch set improves do_store_flag for the single bit case.
We go back to expanding the code directly rather than building some
trees. Plus instead of using shift+and we use directly bit_field
extraction; this improves code generation on avr.
Andrew Pinski (7):
Move fold_single_bit_test to
From: Pan Li
There are 2 local array in function optimize_mode_switching. It will be
initialized conditionally at the beginning but then always consumed in
another loop. It may trigger the warning maybe-uninitialized, and may
result in build failure when enable werror, aka warning as error.
On Fri, 19 May 2023 20:49:47 +
Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
> GCC extension accepts the case when a struct with a flexible array member
> is embedded into another struct or union (possibly recursively).
Do you mean TYPE_TRAILING_FLEXARRAY()?
> diff --git a/gcc/tree.h b/gcc/tree.h
>
On Fri, May 19, 2023 at 9:40 AM Jeff Law via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
>
>
> On 5/18/23 20:14, Andrew Pinski via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > While working something else, I noticed we could improve
> > the following function code generation:
> > ```
> > unsigned f(unsigned t)
> > {
> >if (t & ~(1<<30))
On 5/6/23 10:04, Roger Sayle wrote:
This patch adds support for (a pair of) bit reversal intrinsics
__builtin_nvptx_brev and __builtin_nvptx_brevll which perform 32-bit
and 64-bit bit reversal (using nvptx's brev instruction) matching
the __brev and __brevll instrinsics provided by
On 5/17/23 00:57, liuhongt via Gcc-patches wrote:
r14-172-g0368d169492017 replaces GENERAL_REGS with NO_REGS in cost
calculation when the preferred register class are not known yet.
It regressed powerpc PR109610 and PR109858, it looks too aggressive to use
NO_REGS when mode can be allocated
On 5/16/23 09:37, Marek Polacek via Gcc-patches wrote:
As promised in the --enable-host-pie patch, this patch adds another
configure option, --enable-host-bind-now, which adds -z now when linking
the compiler executables in order to extend hardening. BIND_NOW with RELRO
allows the GOT to be
On Fri, 19 May 2023, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
> +GCC extension accepts a structure containing an ISO C99 @dfn{flexible array
"The GCC extension" or "A GCC extension".
> +@item
> +A structure containing a C99 flexible array member, or a union containing
> +such a structure, is the middle
On Fri, 19 May 2023, Martin Uecker via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Repost for stage 1.
>
>
> C: Remove dead code related to type compatibility across TUs.
>
> Code to detect struct/unions across the same TU is not needed
> anymore. Code for determining compatibility of tagged types is
on a structure with a C99 flexible array member being nested in
another structure.
"GCC extension accepts a structure containing an ISO C99 "flexible array
member", or a union containing such a structure (possibly recursively)
to be a member of a structure.
There are two situations:
* A
On Fri, 19 May 2023, Martin Uecker via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Thanks Joseph!
>
> Revised version attached. Ok?
The C front-end changes and tests are OK.
> But I wonder whether we generally need to do something
> about
>
> sizeof *x
>
> when x is NULL or not initialized. This is quite
GCC extension accepts the case when a struct with a flexible array member
is embedded into another struct or union (possibly recursively).
__builtin_object_size should treat such struct as flexible size.
gcc/c/ChangeLog:
PR tree-optimization/101832
* c-decl.cc (finish_struct):
Hi,
This is the 7th version of the patch, which rebased on the latest trunk.
This is an important patch needed by Linux Kernel security project.
We already have an extensive discussion on this issue and I have went
through 6 revisions of the patches based on the discussion and resolved
all the
Repost for stage 1.
C: Remove dead code related to type compatibility across TUs.
Code to detect struct/unions across the same TU is not needed
anymore. Code for determining compatibility of tagged types is
preserved as it will be used for C2X. Some errors in the unused
On 5/16/23 06:35, Ajit Agarwal wrote:
On 29/04/23 5:03 am, Jeff Law wrote:
On 4/28/23 16:42, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
On Sat, 22 Apr 2023, Ajit Agarwal via Gcc-patches wrote:
Hello All:
This new version of patch 4 use improve ree pass for rs6000 target using
defined ABI interfaces.
On Fri, 19 May 2023, Jeff Law wrote:
> > diff --git a/gcc/config/mips/mips.cc b/gcc/config/mips/mips.cc
> > index ca491b981a3..00f26d5e923 100644
> > --- a/gcc/config/mips/mips.cc
> > +++ b/gcc/config/mips/mips.cc
> > @@ -8313,6 +8313,12 @@ mips_expand_block_move (rtx dest, rtx src, rtx
> >
On Thu, 18 May 2023 21:20:41 +0200
Mikael Morin wrote:
> Le 18/05/2023 à 17:18, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer a écrit :
> > I've fed gfortran.h into the script and found some CLASS_DATA spots,
> > see attached bootstrapped and tested patch.
> > Do we want to have that?
> Some of it makes sense,
On Fri, 19 May 2023, Patrick Palka wrote:
> This implements noexcept-expr mangling (and demangling) as per the
> Itanium ABI.
>
> Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, does this
> look OK for trunk?
>
> PR c++/70790
>
> gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
>
> * mangle.cc
Am 19.05.23 um 19:26 schrieb Jeff Law:
See:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-May/617245.html
I think this needs an update given the other changes in this space.
jeff
I have included the updated the patch below.
The atomic fastpath bypasses the code that releases the sort
This implements noexcept-expr mangling (and demangling) as per the
Itanium ABI.
Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, does this
look OK for trunk?
PR c++/70790
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* mangle.cc (write_expression): Handle NOEXCEPT_EXPR.
libiberty/ChangeLog:
*
On 5/17/23 17:38, Nathan Sidwell via Gcc-patches wrote:
PR 99451 is about the inability to name tree and rtl dumps by plugin
name. And includes a patch. But then I worked around the problem and
forgot about it. Here it is again, retested against trunk.
ok?
nathan
--
Nathan Sidwell
I managed to attach an outdated patch.
Namely: After I tested it, I realized that GCC's testsuite setup already
marks testcases as UNSUPPORTED that use all dg-set-target-env-var – if
remote testing is done → see gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp.
Thus, instead of checking getenv, I can directly use
On 5/19/23 08:48, Andrew Pinski via Gcc-patches wrote:
So the problem here is that in the spec files, we were not marking the pch
output file to be removed on error.
The way to fix this is to mark the --output-pch argument as the output
file argument.
For the C++ specs file, we had to move
On 5/12/23 09:19, Thomas Neumann via Gcc-patches wrote:
Summary: The old linear scan logic called free while searching the list
of frames. The atomic fast path finds the frame quickly, but forgot the
free call. This patches adds the missing free. Bugzilla #109685.
See:
On 5/17/23 03:22, Bo YU wrote:
Hi,
I just want to backport the commit to gcc-13 branch:
commit 203f3060dd363361b172f7295f42bb6bf5ac0b3b
Author: Andreas Schwab
Date: Sat Apr 23 15:48:42 2022 +0200
riscv/linux: Don't add -latomic with -pthread
Now that we have support for
On 5/19/23 09:33, Jeff Law wrote:
On 5/18/23 14:57, Vineet Gupta wrote:
[part #2 of PR/109279]
SPEC2017 deepsjeng uses large constants which currently generates
less than
ideal code. This fix improves codegen for large constants which have
same low and hi parts: e.g.
long long f(void)
On 5/19/23 09:36, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
Works for me. Did you start that performance backports branch?
Either way, I think this should go on it.
Please note that there is a bit of dependency chain. Assuming the
aforementioned branch is gcc 13.1 based, this change also needs my
splitter
I intent to commit this patch early next week — any comments, questions,
concerns?
* * *
I stumbled over this issue when looking at sollve_vv's pull requests
for omp_set_num_teams and omp_get_max_teams testcase (#729 + #728).
While the num_teams clause was honored everywhere, the nteams-var
On 5/16/23 02:56, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
This patch removes the superfluous parallel in [u]divmod patterns
in the AVR backend. Effect of extra parallel is that add_clobbers
reaches gcc_unreachable() because the clobbers for [u]divmod are
missing. The parallel around the parts of an insn
On 5/19/23 00:11, YunQiang Su wrote:
On platform with LWL/LWR, mips_block_move_loop is always used,
which expand __buildin_memcpy/strcpy to a loop of lwl/lwr/swl/swl etc.
For short (normally <=64), it has better performance,
but when the src/dest are long, use memcpy/strcpy lib call may have
On 5/19/23 08:02, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer via Gcc-patches wrote:
On 19 May 2023 07:58:48 CEST, "SenthilKumar.Selvaraj--- via Gcc-patches"
wrote:
Just a nit:
+static bool
+avr_addr_space_zero_address_valid (addr_space_t as ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
+{
+ return flag_delete_null_pointer_checks ==
On 5/18/23 20:14, Andrew Pinski via Gcc-patches wrote:
This is a case which I noticed while working on the previous patch.
Sometimes we end up with `a == CST` instead of comparing against 0.
This happens in the following code:
```
unsigned f(unsigned t)
{
if (t & ~(1<<30))
On 5/18/23 20:14, Andrew Pinski via Gcc-patches wrote:
While working something else, I noticed we could improve
the following function code generation:
```
unsigned f(unsigned t)
{
if (t & ~(1<<30)) __builtin_unreachable();
return t != 0;
}
```
Right know we just emit a comparison
On Fri, 19 May 2023 09:33:34 PDT (-0700), jeffreya...@gmail.com wrote:
On 5/18/23 14:57, Vineet Gupta wrote:
[part #2 of PR/109279]
SPEC2017 deepsjeng uses large constants which currently generates less than
ideal code. This fix improves codegen for large constants which have
same low and hi
On 5/18/23 14:57, Vineet Gupta wrote:
[part #2 of PR/109279]
SPEC2017 deepsjeng uses large constants which currently generates less than
ideal code. This fix improves codegen for large constants which have
same low and hi parts: e.g.
long long f(void) { return 0x0101010101010101ull;
So the problem here is that in the spec files, we were not marking the pch
output file to be removed on error.
The way to fix this is to mark the --output-pch argument as the output
file argument.
For the C++ specs file, we had to move around where the %V was located
such that it would be after
On 19 May 2023 07:58:48 CEST, "SenthilKumar.Selvaraj--- via Gcc-patches"
wrote:
Just a nit:
>+static bool
>+avr_addr_space_zero_address_valid (addr_space_t as ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
>+{
>+ return flag_delete_null_pointer_checks == 0;
>+}
Since we are c++ nowadays, you can omit the parameter name
This has not come up in all those years since the preprocess script
usually is invoked from other scripts, notably post commit hooks. It
can, however, be invoked manually, and error handling is generally a
good thing.
Instead of
cat: foo/bar/index.html: No such file or directory
New file
On Fri, May 19, 2023 at 2:06 PM Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
>
> On Sat, 29 Apr 2023, Jeff Law via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
> > > PR target/105525 is a build regression for the vax and lm32 linux
> > > targets present in gcc-12/13/head, where the builds fail due to
> > > unsatisfied references to
This is built with --disable-werror, so it doesn't fail, but the warning
is there:
https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/devel:gcc:next/gcc14/openSUSE_Factory_RISCV/riscv64
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 7578 EB47 D4E5 4D69 2510 2552 DF73 E780 A9DA
ig/nvptx/team.c (__nvptx_omp_num_threads): New global variable in
shared memory.
ompacc-20230519-2115.patch
Description: ompacc-20230519-2115.patch
Sorry to bother, just tried below build for the RISC-V but failed to
reproduce...
../configure \
--target=riscv64-unknown-elf \
--prefix=${INSTALL_DIR} \
--disable-shared \
--enable-threads \
--enable-tls \
--enable-languages=c,c++ \
--with-system-zlib \
--with-newlib \
Hi Andreas,
Could you please help to share more information about how to trigger this
error? As you don't mentioned, I assume below error comes from X86 build. I
take below configuration but failed to reproduce.
mkdir __BUILD_X86 && cd __BUILD_X86
../configure --enable-language=c,c++
>> What about the rest of the changes? It's not all typos but I tried
>> to unify the mask/policy handling a bit.
Oh, I see. You rename get_prefer into get_preferred.
This makes perfect sense to me.
juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
From: Robin Dapp
Date: 2023-05-19 20:07
To: 钟居哲; gcc-patches;
>>> + TAIL_UNDEFINED = -1,
>>> + MASK_UNDEFINED = -1,
> Why you add this ?
>
>>> + void add_policy_operands (enum tail_policy vta = TAIL_UNDEFINED,
>>> + enum mask_policy vma = MASK_UNDEFINED)
> No, you should just specify this as TAIL_ANY or MASK_ANY as default value.
That's the value I
On Sat, 29 Apr 2023, Jeff Law via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > PR target/105525 is a build regression for the vax and lm32 linux
> > targets present in gcc-12/13/head, where the builds fail due to
> > unsatisfied references to __INTPTR_TYPE__ and __UINTPTR_TYPE__,
> > caused by these two targets
>> + TAIL_UNDEFINED = -1,
>> + MASK_UNDEFINED = -1,
Why you add this ?
>> + void add_policy_operands (enum tail_policy vta = TAIL_UNDEFINED,
>> + enum mask_policy vma = MASK_UNDEFINED)
No, you should just specify this as TAIL_ANY or MASK_ANY as default value.
>>const_vlmax_p (machine_mode
Thanks Joseph!
Revised version attached. Ok?
But I wonder whether we generally need to do something
about
sizeof *x
when x is NULL or not initialized. This is quite commonly
used in C code and if the type is not of variable size,
it is also unproblematic. So the UB for variable size is
On Tue, 2 May 2023, Jeff Law via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Well, I'd say that my plan would be to deprecate any target that is not
> converted by the end of this development cycle. So the change keeps cris from
> falling into that bucket.
As I noted in the other thread it is highly unlikely I will
LGTM
Robin Dapp via Gcc-patches 於 2023年5月19日 週五 19:07
寫道：
> Hi,
>
> this fixes a rebase oversight regarding the loading
> of vector constants. Added another test to properly
> catch that in the future.
>
> Regards
> Robin
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> * config/riscv/riscv.cc
LGTM
Robin Dapp via Gcc-patches 於 2023年5月19日 週五 19:10
寫道：
> Hi,
>
> this obvious patch removes empty run template files and one redundant
> stdio.h include.
>
> Regards
> Robin
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>
> * gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/binop/shift-run.c: Do not include
> .
Hi,
this patch implements autovec expanders of abs2, vneg2 and
vnot2 for integers. I also tried to refactor the helper code
in riscv-v.cc a bit. Guess it's not enough to warrant a separate patch
though.
Regards
Robin
gcc/ChangeLog:
* config/riscv/autovec.md (2): Fix typo.
Hi Jie,
Thank you for your submission.
Since I was a member of the team that developed this ASE in cooperation
with the hardware group, I did the binutils part, and it was even myself
who came up with the name for the ASE in an internal discussion, I feel
somewhat responsible for this
Hi,
this obvious patch removes empty run template files and one redundant
stdio.h include.
Regards
Robin
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/binop/shift-run.c: Do not include
.
* gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/binop/shift-run-template.h: Removed.
"juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai" writes:
> Hi, Richard. Thanks for the comments.
>
> Would you mind telling me whether it is possible that we can make decrement
> IV support into GCC middle-end ?
>
> If yes, could you tell what I should do next for the patches since I am
> confused that it seems the
Hi,
this fixes a rebase oversight regarding the loading
of vector constants. Added another test to properly
catch that in the future.
Regards
Robin
gcc/ChangeLog:
* config/riscv/riscv.cc (riscv_const_insns): Remove else.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
*
"juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai" writes:
>>> I don't think this is a property of decrementing IVs. IIUC it's really
>>> a property of rgl->factor == 1 && factor == 1, where factor would need
>>> to be passed in by the caller. Because of that, it should probably be
>>> a separate patch.
> Is it right that
Hi, Richard. Thanks for the comments.
Would you mind telling me whether it is possible that we can make decrement IV
support into GCC middle-end ?
If yes, could you tell what I should do next for the patches since I am
confused that it seems the implementation of this
patch should totally be
On Thu, 18 May 2023 at 22:04, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
>
> Prathamesh Kulkarni writes:
> > On Thu, 18 May 2023 at 13:37, Richard Sandiford
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Prathamesh Kulkarni writes:
> >> > On Tue, 16 May 2023 at 00:29, Richard Sandiford
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Prathamesh Kulkarni
> Am 19.05.2023 um 10:06 schrieb Jakub Jelinek :
>
> Hi!
>
> In the pattern recognition of signed __builtin_mul_overflow{,_p} we
> check for result of unsigned division (which follows unsigned
> multiplication) being equality compared against one of the multiplication's
> argument (the one
> Am 19.05.2023 um 10:00 schrieb Jakub Jelinek :
>
> Hi!
>
> As can be seen on the following testcase, we pattern recognize it on
> i?86/x86_64 as return __builtin_mul_overflow_p (x, y, 0UL) and avoid
> that way the extra division, but don't do it e.g. on aarch64 or ppc64le,
> even when
In function 'int optimize_mode_switching()',
inlined from 'virtual unsigned int
{anonymous}::pass_mode_switching::execute(function*)' at
../../gcc/mode-switching.cc:909:31:
../../gcc/mode-switching.cc:608:29: error: 'bb_info$' may be used uninitialized
[-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
608 |
>> I don't think this is a property of decrementing IVs. IIUC it's really
>> a property of rgl->factor == 1 && factor == 1, where factor would need
>> to be passed in by the caller. Because of that, it should probably be
>> a separate patch.
Is it right that I just post this part code as a
Thanks for the update. I'll split this review into two pieces.
Second piece to follow (not sure when, but hopefully soon).
juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai writes:
> diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
> index ed0166fedab..6f49bdee009 100644
> --- a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
> +++
Tejas Belagod writes:
> Am I correct to understand that we still need to check for the case when
> there's a repeating non-zero elements in the case of NELTS_PER_PATTERN == 2?
> eg. { 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1,} which should be encoded as {0, 0, 1, 1} with
> NPATTERNS = 2 ?
Yeah, that's right. The
Hello All:
This patch improves code sinking pass to sink statements before call to reduce
register pressure.
Review comments are incorporated.
For example :
void bar();
int j;
void foo(int a, int b, int c, int d, int e, int f)
{
int l;
l = a + b + c + d +e + f;
if (a != 5)
{
From: Richard Sandiford
Date: Tuesday, May 16, 2023 at 5:36 PM
To: Tejas Belagod
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [PR96339] AArch64: Optimise svlast[ab]
Tejas Belagod writes:
>>> + {
>>> + b = build3 (BIT_FIELD_REF, TREE_TYPE (f.lhs), val,
>>> +
...Ok, and now with the patch attached...
Here is a revised version of the patch. The difference to the
previous one is that it adds some combine patterns for *cbranch
insns that were lost in the PR92729 transition. The post-reload
part of the patterns were still there. The new patterns are
Thanks for your advice, Kito.
在 2023/5/19 15:35, Kito Cheng 写道:
I am concern about we didn't define POINTERS_EXTEND_UNSIGNED here, and
also concern about the code model stuffs, I know currently Guo-Ren's
implementation is rely on some MMU trick, but I am not sure does it
also applicable on
Hi!
When an OpenMP program with target regions is linked statically,
it fails to link on various arches (doesn't when using recent glibc
because it has libdl stuff in libc), because libgomp.a(target.o) uses
dlopen/dlsym/dlclose, but we aren't linking against -ldl (unless
user asked for that). We
Here is a revised version of the patch. The difference to the
previous one is that it adds some combine patterns for *cbranch
insns that were lost in the PR92729 transition. The post-reload
part of the patterns were still there. The new patterns are
slightly more general in that they also
Pushed.
Gerald
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
* doc/xml/manual/strings.xml: Move lafstern.org reference to https.
* doc/html/manual/strings.html: Regenerate.
---
libstdc++-v3/doc/html/manual/strings.html | 2 +-
libstdc++-v3/doc/xml/manual/strings.xml | 2 +-
2 files changed, 2
On Fri, May 19, 2023 at 10:08:28AM +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> This is how I actually noticed the situation in gcc-13/buildstat.html
> (and then I mixed the two up).
>
> Jakub, do you have some old templates somewhere maybe?
Usually I git diff last year's changes and apply that after
Tested across the Darwin range (this patch has been on the WIP branches for
some time) and on x86_64-linux-gnu, for reference.
pushed to trunk, thanks
Iain
--- 8< ---
Tools from later versions of the OS deprecate or fail to support
earlier OS revisions.
Signed-off-by: Iain Sandoe
This is how I actually noticed the situation in gcc-13/buildstat.html
(and then I mixed the two up).
Jakub, do you have some old templates somewhere maybe?
Gerald
Pushed:
---
htdocs/onlinedocs/13.1.0/index.html | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git
From: Simon Dardis
Support for __attribute__ ((code_readable)). Takes up to one argument of
"yes", "no", "pcrel". This will change the code readability setting for just
that function. If no argument is supplied, then the setting is 'yes'.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* config/mips/mips.cc (enum
Hi!
In the pattern recognition of signed __builtin_mul_overflow{,_p} we
check for result of unsigned division (which follows unsigned
multiplication) being equality compared against one of the multiplication's
argument (the one not used in the division) and check for the comparison
to be done
Hi!
As can be seen on the following testcase, we pattern recognize it on
i?86/x86_64 as return __builtin_mul_overflow_p (x, y, 0UL) and avoid
that way the extra division, but don't do it e.g. on aarch64 or ppc64le,
even when return __builtin_mul_overflow_p (x, y, 0UL); actually produces
there
Support for __attribute__ ((code_readable)). Takes up to one argument of
"yes", "no", "pcrel". This will change the code readability setting for just
that function. If no argument is supplied, then the setting is 'yes'.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* config/mips/mips.cc (enum
Hello All:
Update powerpc tests for both le and be endian with extra removal of zero
extension and sign extension.
with default ree pass for rs6000 target.
Bootstrapped and regtested on powerpc64-linux-gnu.
Thanks & Regards
Ajit
rs6000: Update powerpc test fold-vec-extract-int.p8.c
Update
1 - 100 of 102 matches
Mail list logo
