Re: [PATCH] Fix ldist memset discovery with -0.0 (PR tree-optimization/72824)

On Tue, 9 Aug 2016, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 08:53:54AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > > Hmm, I don't think we should see -0.0 as +0.0 with -fno-signed-zeros. > > As far as I can see this is a memory load/store op and we may not > > transform, say, > > > > double x =

Re: [PATCH] Fix ldist memset discovery with -0.0 (PR tree-optimization/72824)

On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 08:53:54AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > Hmm, I don't think we should see -0.0 as +0.0 with -fno-signed-zeros. > As far as I can see this is a memory load/store op and we may not > transform, say, > > double x = a[i]; > b[i] = x; > > into a copy that changes -0.0 to

Re: [PATCH] Fix ldist memset discovery with -0.0 (PR tree-optimization/72824)

On Mon, 8 Aug 2016, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > Only +0.0 stores can be optimized into memset, -0.0 can't, so if we are > honoring signed zeros, we should make sure the constant is positive. > > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk? Hmm, I don't think we

[PATCH] Fix ldist memset discovery with -0.0 (PR tree-optimization/72824)

Hi! Only +0.0 stores can be optimized into memset, -0.0 can't, so if we are honoring signed zeros, we should make sure the constant is positive. Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk? 2016-08-08 Jakub Jelinek PR tree-optimization/72824