[Bug target/84033] powerpc64le -moptimize-swaps bad code with vec_vbpermq

2018-03-28 Thread brenohl at br dot ibm.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84033 Breno Leitao changed: What|Removed |Added CC||brenohl at br dot ibm.com --- Comment #7

[Bug target/78543] [6 Regression] ICE in push_reload, at reload.c:1349 on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

2017-03-21 Thread brenohl at br dot ibm.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78543 --- Comment #16 from Breno Leitao --- If it helps, the problem is reproducible on some other packages as well. Here is another example: https://nopaste.linux-dev.org/?1122124

[Bug libgcc/78576] [PPC] wrong long double to long int conversion

2016-11-29 Thread brenohl at br dot ibm.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78576 --- Comment #13 from Breno Leitao --- (In reply to Bill Schmidt from comment #11) > Breno, what is your environment? Which glibc is present? We found this problem originally on Debian[1], but we tested and reproduced it even on Big Endian distr

[Bug libgcc/78576] New: [PPC] wrong long double to long int conversion

2016-11-28 Thread brenohl at br dot ibm.com
: libgcc Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: brenohl at br dot ibm.com Target Milestone: --- On ppc64le environment, I am facing an wrong conversion between long double and long int. This is my test case, which prints 27 instead of 26. #include #include int main

[Bug target/78543] [6 Regression] ICE in push_reload, at reload.c:1349 on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

2016-11-28 Thread brenohl at br dot ibm.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78543 --- Comment #7 from Breno Leitao --- Created attachment 40182 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40182&action=edit gcc dump with pre processed file

[Bug target/78543] [6 Regression] ICE in push_reload, at reload.c:1349 on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

2016-11-28 Thread brenohl at br dot ibm.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78543 Breno Leitao changed: What|Removed |Added CC||brenohl at br dot ibm.com --- Comment #5

[Bug target/78386] [PPC] Optimization -O2 and higher cause math inconsistency

2016-11-22 Thread brenohl at br dot ibm.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78386 Breno Leitao changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED --- Comment #12 from Breno Leitao

[Bug tree-optimization/78386] Powerpc64le: optimization -O2 and higher cause math inconsistency

2016-11-16 Thread brenohl at br dot ibm.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78386 --- Comment #2 from Breno Leitao --- I did further tests with older versions, and the problem is also reproducible, so, this is not a regression. These are the versions I tested also: * gcc-5 (Debian 5.4.1-3) 5.4.1 20161019 * gcc-4 (Debian

[Bug c/78386] New: Powerpc64le: optimization -O2 and higher cause math inconsitency

2016-11-16 Thread brenohl at br dot ibm.com
Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: brenohl at br dot ibm.com Target Milestone: --- When compiling fdlibm with O2 or higher, the math results are different. I just write a simple example, invoking jcos() and invoking it