> -----Original Message----- > From: Li, Pan2 <pan2...@intel.com> > Sent: 2024年7月19日 18:33 > To: Demin Han <demin....@starfivetech.com>; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai; kito.ch...@gmail.com; jeffreya...@gmail.com; > rdapp....@gmail.com > Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] RISC-V: More support of vx and vf for autovec > comparison > > > + TEST_COND_IMM_FLOAT (T, >, 0.0, _gt) > > \ > > + TEST_COND_IMM_FLOAT (T, <, 0.0, _lt) > > \ > > + TEST_COND_IMM_FLOAT (T, >=, 0.0, _ge) > > \ > > + TEST_COND_IMM_FLOAT (T, <=, 0.0, _le) > > \ > > + TEST_COND_IMM_FLOAT (T, ==, 0.0, _eq) > > \ > > + TEST_COND_IMM_FLOAT (T, !=, 0.0, _ne) > > \ > > Just curious, does this patch covered float imm is -0.0 (notice only +0.0 is > mentioned)? > If so we can have similar tests as +0.0 here. > > It is totally Ok if -0.0f is not applicable here.
I have a test. The backend can't see -0.0 and It becomes 0.0 when translate to gimple. > Pan > Regards, Demin
