https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
--- Comment #27 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Peter Bergner
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f8f02fd0bfeeb733a044a120b394eeac48de318a
commit r11-11413-gf8f02fd0bfeeb733a044a120b394eeac48de318a
Author: Peter Bergner
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
--- Comment #26 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Peter Bergner
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:26d48b6d3e2d07583f25f0769d0c005864760aee
commit r11-11412-g26d48b6d3e2d07583f25f0769d0c005864760aee
Author: Peter Bergner
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
--- Comment #25 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Peter Bergner
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:04ca18ff5e2592ac88a5b72248332f519a17184b
commit r12-10409-g04ca18ff5e2592ac88a5b72248332f519a17184b
Author: Will Schmidt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
--- Comment #24 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Peter Bergner
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:135402288a1b1b082d2e71ff2ee5c63b7dafed9f
commit r12-10408-g135402288a1b1b082d2e71ff2ee5c63b7dafed9f
Author: Peter Bergner
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
--- Comment #23 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Peter Bergner
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0ae9252f7b52151209b36d8a1cefc49f1b23fa46
commit r13-8673-g0ae9252f7b52151209b36d8a1cefc49f1b23fa46
Author: Will Schmidt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
--- Comment #22 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Peter Bergner
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d42105742841e73ca867b6da0c5ca6ad4d86fed6
commit r13-8672-gd42105742841e73ca867b6da0c5ca6ad4d86fed6
Author: Peter Bergner
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
--- Comment #21 from Peter Bergner ---
Fixed on trunk. I'll let it burn-in there for a bit before backporting to the
release branches.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
--- Comment #20 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Peter Bergner :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:aa57af93ba22865be747f926e4e5f219e7f8758a
commit r14-9949-gaa57af93ba22865be747f926e4e5f219e7f8758a
Author: Will Schmidt
Date: F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL|https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma |https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
--- Comment #18 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Peter Bergner :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7924e352523b37155ed9d76dc426701de9d11a22
commit r14-9884-g7924e352523b37155ed9d76dc426701de9d11a22
Author: Peter Bergner
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|willschm at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
--- Comment #16 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to wschmidt from comment #14)
> I disagree with that. You should use __VSX__ && _ARCH_PWR9 to check for
> P9 vector support, etc. The __POWERn_VECTOR__ things really are not
> great and I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
--- Comment #15 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to HaoChen Gui from comment #9)
> For this example, let's suppose that we set mcpu=power8 and mno-vsx in the
> command line. Thus, _ARCH_PWR8 should be defined as mcpu=power8. But if the
> Po
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
--- Comment #14 from wschmidt at linux dot ibm.com ---
On 8/31/21 11:09 AM, bergner at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
>
> --- Comment #13 from Peter Bergner ---
> (In reply to Tulio Magno Quites Mach
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
--- Comment #13 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho from comment #12)
> There is a chance, that my previous comment is wrong with regards the
> generation of VSX instructions for Power8.
>
> I don't know what th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
--- Comment #12 from Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho ---
There is a chance, that my previous comment is wrong with regards the
generation of VSX instructions for Power8.
I don't know what the second command means:
$ gcc-11 -mcpu=power10 -dM -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
--- Comment #11 from Bill Schmidt ---
Thanks, Tulio, exactly right.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
--- Comment #10 from Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho ---
(In reply to HaoChen Gui from comment #9)
> For this example, let's suppose that we set mcpu=power8 and mno-vsx in the
> command line. Thus, _ARCH_PWR8 should be defined as mcpu=power8. B
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
--- Comment #9 from HaoChen Gui ---
(In reply to Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho from comment #7)
> (In reply to HaoChen Gui from comment #6)
> > Does _ARCH_PWR8 impact anything during the compiling?
>
> I can answer this question from an user
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
--- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to HaoChen Gui from comment #6)
> (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #5)
> > (In reply to HaoChen Gui from comment #4)
> > > I wonder if it's a Power8 architecture when those 6 optio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
--- Comment #7 from Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho ---
(In reply to HaoChen Gui from comment #6)
> Does _ARCH_PWR8 impact anything during the compiling?
I can answer this question from an user point of view. It's used in many
projects to indi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
--- Comment #6 from HaoChen Gui ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #5)
> (In reply to HaoChen Gui from comment #4)
> > I wonder if it's a Power8 architecture when those 6 options are all
> > disabled. Or it is regressed to Power7?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to HaoChen Gui from comment #4)
> I wonder if it's a Power8 architecture when those 6 options are all
> disabled. Or it is regressed to Power7? The "_ARCH_PWR8" represents the
> hardware archi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
--- Comment #4 from HaoChen Gui ---
Codes in rs6000-cpus.def,
#define ISA_2_7_MASKS_SERVER(ISA_2_6_MASKS_SERVER \
| OPTION_MASK_P8_VECTOR\
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
The current code reads
if ((flags & OPTION_MASK_DIRECT_MOVE) != 0)
rs6000_define_or_undefine_macro (define_p, "_ARCH_PWR8");
if ((flags & OPTION_MASK_MODULO) != 0)
rs6000_define_or_undefine
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
--- Comment #2 from Bill Schmidt ---
The _ARCH_PWR8 predefine is conditioned on a flag that can be disabled by
-mno-vsx or -mno-altivec. That is a Bad Thing.
It appears (as David pointed out privately) that this problem is limited to
_ARCH_PWR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101865
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
28 matches
Mail list logo
