Re: [Aarch64] Vector Function Application Binary Interface Specification for OpenMP

On Friday 17 March 2017 07:31 PM, James Greenhalgh wrote: > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 09:50:18AM +, Sekhar, Ashwin wrote: >> Hi GCC Team, Aarch64 Maintainers, >> >> >> The rules in Vector Function Application Binary Interface Specification for >> OpenMP >

[Aarch64] Vector Function Application Binary Interface Specification for OpenMP

' is used for indicating the ASIMD isa. Please review and comment. Thanks and Regards, Ashwin Sekhar T K CUT HERE --  Aarch64 Vector Fu

Problem regarding canonicalization

--a, it becomes positive and the conditions get reversed thus leading to failure during execution. Similar problem seems to arise when MAX is passed to a function that does "return (++a < 0). How do I tackle this problem? Anything I may be missing? Thanks in advance. Ashwin

Re: Separating c++ parser

something I am still missing? :) Thanks, Ashwin On 9/12/05, Diego Novillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 09/12/05 15:30, Ashwin Bharambe wrote: > > >is it possible to plug out the parser and intermediate representation code > >(presumably only in the front-end?) rela

Separating c++ parser

I am not concerned with code generation or optimization at all, I don't think I would need this. How would I begin simplifying the auto* and Makefile.in's to allow building the parser as a stand-alone entity? Thanks in advance for any help or pointers! Ashwin -- Ashwin Bharambe,

Re: Problem with peephole to peephole2 conversion

uced peep2_reg_dead_p? Ashwin

Re: Problem with peephole to peephole2 conversion

deed dead_or_set_p even has a loop inside it. > > Paolo Thanks a lot for ur help. can u give me a pointer to the origin of peep2_reg_dead_p? Regards, Ashwin

Re: Problem with peephole to peephole2 conversion

On 8/25/05, Ashwin Kolhe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > You'll have something like this in your test > > > > operands[0] == operands[1] || peep2_regno_dead_p (2, operands[0]) > > > > i.e. you only need to test for op0's death if it is different from

Re: Problem with peephole to peephole2 conversion

se correct me if i am wrong. Thanks in advance, Ashwin.

Re: Problem with peephole to peephole2 conversion

cks if the insn sets the operand. Regards, Ashwin Richard Henderson wrote: On Wed, Aug 24, 2005 at 06:50:25PM +0530, Ashwin wrote: The pattern matches in the original peephole pass because the peephole pass happens just before assembly generation, when the 3 insns are present together. H

Problem with peephole to peephole2 conversion

I am converting peepholes to peephole2's. However, after compiling the kernel with the patched build, I get size regressions. Although the obj-dump shows that the peephole should have matched, it is actually not getting matched. This is because the pattern to be matched is not present at the ti