On Wed, 18 Aug 2021 at 20:10, Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> On 8/18/21 12:52 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> > On Fri, 13 Aug 2021 at 22:44, Martin Sebor wrote:
> >>
> >> On 8/12/21 2:32 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> >>> On Sat, 7 Aug 2021 at 02:09, Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> On 8/6/21 4:51
On 8/18/21 12:52 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
On Fri, 13 Aug 2021 at 22:44, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 8/12/21 2:32 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
On Sat, 7 Aug 2021 at 02:09, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 8/6/21 4:51 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
On 06/08/2021 01:06, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote:
On Fri, 13 Aug 2021 at 22:44, Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> On 8/12/21 2:32 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> > On Sat, 7 Aug 2021 at 02:09, Martin Sebor wrote:
> >>
> >> On 8/6/21 4:51 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 06/08/2021 01:06, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote:
> On 8/4/21 3:46 A
On 8/12/21 2:32 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
On Sat, 7 Aug 2021 at 02:09, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 8/6/21 4:51 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
On 06/08/2021 01:06, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote:
On 8/4/21 3:46 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
On 03/08/2021 18:44, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 8/3/21 4:11
On Sat, 7 Aug 2021 at 02:09, Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> On 8/6/21 4:51 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 06/08/2021 01:06, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote:
> >> On 8/4/21 3:46 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 03/08/2021 18:44, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 8/3/21 4:11 AM, Prathame
On 8/6/21 4:51 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
On 06/08/2021 01:06, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote:
On 8/4/21 3:46 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
On 03/08/2021 18:44, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 8/3/21 4:11 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc wrote:
On Tue, 27 Jul 2021 at 13:49, Richard Biener
wrote:
On M
> On Wed, 4 Aug 2021 at 03:27, Segher Boessenkool
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 04:23:42PM +0530, Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc wrote:
> > > The constraint here is that, vshl_n intrinsics require that the
> > > second arg (__b),
> > > should be an immediate value.
> >
> > Some
On 06/08/2021 01:06, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote:
On 8/4/21 3:46 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
On 03/08/2021 18:44, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 8/3/21 4:11 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc wrote:
On Tue, 27 Jul 2021 at 13:49, Richard Biener
wrote:
On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 11:06 AM Prathamesh Kul
On 8/4/21 3:46 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
On 03/08/2021 18:44, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 8/3/21 4:11 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc wrote:
On Tue, 27 Jul 2021 at 13:49, Richard Biener
wrote:
On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 11:06 AM Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 2021 at 23:29,
On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 02:31:02PM +0530, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Aug 2021 at 18:30, Richard Earnshaw
> wrote:
> > We don't want to have to resort to macros. Not least because at some
> > point we want to replace the content of arm_neon.h with a single #pragma
> > directive to remo
On 04/08/2021 18:59, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 07:08:08PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Segher Boessenkool:
>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 03:27:00PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
On 04/08/2021 14:40, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 02:00:
On Wed, 4 Aug 2021 at 18:30, Richard Earnshaw
wrote:
>
> On 04/08/2021 13:46, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 05:20:58PM +0530, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> >> On Wed, 4 Aug 2021 at 15:49, Segher Boessenkool
> >> wrote:
> >>> Both __builtin_constant_p and __is_constexpr will
On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 07:08:08PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Segher Boessenkool:
>
> > On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 03:27:00PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> >> On 04/08/2021 14:40, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >> >On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 02:00:42PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> >> >>We don'
* Segher Boessenkool:
> On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 03:27:00PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
>> On 04/08/2021 14:40, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>> >On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 02:00:42PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
>> >>We don't want to have to resort to macros. Not least because at some
>> >>point we
On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 03:27:00PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> On 04/08/2021 14:40, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 02:00:42PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> >>We don't want to have to resort to macros. Not least because at some
> >>point we want to replace the content
On 04/08/2021 14:40, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 02:00:42PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
We don't want to have to resort to macros. Not least because at some
point we want to replace the content of arm_neon.h with a single #pragma
directive to remove all the parsing o
On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 02:00:42PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> We don't want to have to resort to macros. Not least because at some
> point we want to replace the content of arm_neon.h with a single #pragma
> directive to remove all the parsing of the header that's needed. What's
> more, if
On 04/08/2021 13:46, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 05:20:58PM +0530, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>> On Wed, 4 Aug 2021 at 15:49, Segher Boessenkool
>> wrote:
>>> Both __builtin_constant_p and __is_constexpr will not work in your use
>>> case (since a function argument is not a
On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 05:20:58PM +0530, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Aug 2021 at 15:49, Segher Boessenkool
> wrote:
> > Both __builtin_constant_p and __is_constexpr will not work in your use
> > case (since a function argument is not a constant, let alone an ICE).
> > It only becomes a
On Wed, 4 Aug 2021 at 15:49, Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 03:20:45PM +0530, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> > On Wed, 4 Aug 2021 at 03:27, Segher Boessenkool
> > wrote:
> > > The Linux kernel has a macro __is_constexpr to test if something is an
> > > integer constant expres
On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 03:20:45PM +0530, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Aug 2021 at 03:27, Segher Boessenkool
> wrote:
> > The Linux kernel has a macro __is_constexpr to test if something is an
> > integer constant expression, see . That is a much
> > better idea imo. There could be a
On Wed, 4 Aug 2021 at 03:27, Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 04:23:42PM +0530, Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc wrote:
> > The constraint here is that, vshl_n intrinsics require that the
> > second arg (__b),
> > should be an immediate value.
>
> Something that matches the
On 03/08/2021 18:44, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 8/3/21 4:11 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc wrote:
On Tue, 27 Jul 2021 at 13:49, Richard Biener
wrote:
On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 11:06 AM Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 2021 at 23:29, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Fri, Jul 23, 20
Hi!
On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 04:23:42PM +0530, Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc wrote:
> The constraint here is that, vshl_n intrinsics require that the
> second arg (__b),
> should be an immediate value.
Something that matches the "n" constraint, not necessarily a literal,
but stricter than just "imme
On 8/3/21 4:11 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc wrote:
On Tue, 27 Jul 2021 at 13:49, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 11:06 AM Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 2021 at 23:29, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 3:55 AM Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
wr
On Tue, 3 Aug 2021 at 15:41, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
>
> On Tue, 27 Jul 2021 at 13:49, Richard Biener
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 11:06 AM Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, 23 Jul 2021 at 23:29, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jul 23, 2021
On Tue, 27 Jul 2021 at 13:49, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 11:06 AM Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 23 Jul 2021 at 23:29, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 3:55 AM Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > >
On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 11:06 AM Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
wrote:
>
> On Fri, 23 Jul 2021 at 23:29, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 3:55 AM Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > > Continuing from this thread,
> > > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-pat
On Fri, 23 Jul 2021 at 23:29, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 3:55 AM Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> > Continuing from this thread,
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-July/575920.html
> > The proposal is to provide a mechanism to mark a paramet
On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 3:55 AM Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc
wrote:
>
> Hi,
> Continuing from this thread,
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-July/575920.html
> The proposal is to provide a mechanism to mark a parameter in a
> function as a literal constant.
>
> Motivation:
> Consider
Hi,
Continuing from this thread,
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-July/575920.html
The proposal is to provide a mechanism to mark a parameter in a
function as a literal constant.
Motivation:
Consider the following intrinsic vshl_n_s32 from arrm/arm_neon.h:
__extension__ extern __inl
31 matches
Mail list logo
