On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 3:29 PM Matthew Malcomson
wrote:
>
> Hi there,
>
> I'd like to make handling of the __RTL function testcases where the
> startwith pass name is either invalid, not used for that optimisation
> level, or non-existant more understandable.
>
> Currently a problem with the pass
On 2/19/19 9:09 PM, Alan Modra wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 01:13:31PM -0600, Peter Bergner wrote:
>> long input;
>> long
>> bug (void)
>> {
>> register long output asm ("r3");
>> asm ("blah %0, %1, %2" : "=&r" (output) : "r" (input), "0" (input));
>> return output;
>> }
>>
>> I know an i
On 2/18/19, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> GCC already has most of this support. See
> https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-8.2.0/gcc/Vector-Extensions.html#Vector-Extensions
>
> The dot in the typenames are not going to supported though.
>
> Thanks,
> Andrew
--what #include files and/or compiler flags ar
On Wed, 20 Feb 2019, Warren D Smith wrote:
> but if I try to replace that with the nicer (since more portable)
>c = __builtin_shuffle(a, b);
> then
> error: use of unknown builtin '__builtin_shuffle'
> [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
Most likely you're on OS X and the 'gcc' command actually
On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 10:08:07AM -0600, Peter Bergner wrote:
> On 2/19/19 9:09 PM, Alan Modra wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 01:13:31PM -0600, Peter Bergner wrote:
> >> long input;
> >> long
> >> bug (void)
> >> {
> >> register long output asm ("r3");
> >> asm ("blah %0, %1, %2" : "=&r" (
On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 10:08:07AM -0600, Peter Bergner wrote:
> On 2/19/19 9:09 PM, Alan Modra wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 01:13:31PM -0600, Peter Bergner wrote:
> >> long input;
> >> long
> >> bug (void)
> >> {
> >> register long output asm ("r3");
> >> asm ("blah %0, %1, %2" : "=&r" (
I forgot to say, gcc-6, gcc-7 and gcc-8 handle your original testcase
with the register asm just fine.
--
Alan Modra
Australia Development Lab, IBM
On 2/20/19 4:19 PM, Alan Modra wrote:
> I forgot to say, gcc-6, gcc-7 and gcc-8 handle your original testcase
> with the register asm just fine.
Yes, because they don't have my IRA and LRA patches that exposed this
problem. I would say they were buggy for not complaining and silently
spilling a ha
On 2/20/19 4:04 PM, Alan Modra wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 10:08:07AM -0600, Peter Bergner wrote:
>> On 2/19/19 9:09 PM, Alan Modra wrote:
>> That said, talking with Segher and Uli offline, they both think the
>> inline asm usage in the test case should be legal
>
> Good, it seems we are in a
On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 08:57:52PM -0600, Peter Bergner wrote:
> On 2/20/19 4:19 PM, Alan Modra wrote:
> > I forgot to say, gcc-6, gcc-7 and gcc-8 handle your original testcase
> > with the register asm just fine.
>
> Yes, because they don't have my IRA and LRA patches that exposed this
> problem.
10 matches
Mail list logo