[Bug target/100799] Stackoverflow in optimized code on PPC

2024-03-22 Thread aagarwa at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100799 --- Comment #34 from Ajit Kumar Agarwal --- Sent the patch for review. Here is the patch: PATCH] rs6000: Stackoverflow in optimized code on PPC (PR100799) When using FlexiBLAS with OpenBLAS we noticed corruption of the parameters passed to Ope

[Bug target/100799] Stackoverflow in optimized code on PPC

2024-03-22 Thread aagarwa at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100799 --- Comment #33 from Ajit Kumar Agarwal --- Sent the patch for review. Here is the patch: PATCH] rs6000: Stackoverflow in optimized code on PPC (PR100799) When using FlexiBLAS with OpenBLAS we noticed corruption of the parameters passed to Ope

[Bug tree-optimization/36010] Loop interchange not performed

2023-10-16 Thread aagarwa at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36010 Ajit Kumar Agarwal changed: What|Removed |Added CC||aagarwa at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comm

[Bug target/103784] suboptimal code for returning bool value on target ppc

2023-08-31 Thread aagarwa at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103784 --- Comment #16 from Ajit Kumar Agarwal --- This patch https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-July/624751.html removes the zero extension from the below testcase that has different cfg, My patch is not based on any CFG shape but it is g

[Bug target/91804] [10/11/12/13/14 regression] r265398 breaks gcc.target/powerpc/vec-rlmi-rlnm.c

2023-06-20 Thread aagarwa at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91804 Ajit Kumar Agarwal changed: What|Removed |Added CC||aagarwa at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comm

[Bug testsuite/109880] [14 regression] gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-extract-int.p8.c fails after r14-916-g9417b30499ce09

2023-05-18 Thread aagarwa at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109880 --- Comment #2 from Ajit Kumar Agarwal --- Yes these are redundant zero extend and can be removed. I will update the tests and send the patch for review.

[Bug target/65010] ppc backend generates unnecessary signed extension

2023-04-11 Thread aagarwa at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65010 Ajit Kumar Agarwal changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug target/103784] suboptimal code for returning bool value on target ppc

2023-04-11 Thread aagarwa at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103784 Ajit Kumar Agarwal changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/41742] Unnecessary zero-extension at -O2 but not -O1

2023-04-11 Thread aagarwa at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41742 Ajit Kumar Agarwal changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug middle-end/82940] Suboptimal code for (a & 0x7f) | (b & 0x80) on powerpc

2023-04-11 Thread aagarwa at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82940 Ajit Kumar Agarwal changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED