https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77399
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77399
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77399
--- Comment #17 from Alexander Monakov ---
Test shown in comment #2 is still not optimized at -O2, so as comment #12 said,
> Load part remains.
Not sure if that needs to be split off into a separate bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77399
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #16
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77399
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Oct 4 13:40:54 2016
New Revision: 240744
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=240744&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-10-04 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/77399
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77399
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tamar.christina at arm dot com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77399
--- Comment #13 from Andreas Schwab ---
Executing on host: /daten/gcc/gcc-20161002/Build/gcc/xgcc
-B/daten/gcc/gcc-20161002/Build/gcc/
/daten/gcc/gcc-20161002/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/forwprop-35.c -m32
-fno-diagnostics-show-caret -fdiag
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77399
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener ---
Load part remains.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77399
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Sep 30 07:06:16 2016
New Revision: 240646
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=240646&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-09-30 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/77399
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77399
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77399
--- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 30 Aug 2016, amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77399
>
> --- Comment #8 from Alexander Monakov ---
> > The extension is closely modeled af
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77399
--- Comment #8 from Alexander Monakov ---
> The extension is closely modeled after openCL
Hm, that doesn't sound right: gcc had vector types long before OpenCL was even
a thing; I believe it's modeled after Altivec actually: the discrepancy betw
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77399
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #6)
> Thanks. Any comment on having gimple lowering emit cleaner code in the first
> place?
well, I'm not sure if it is worth the trouble. FEs emit
return <<<
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77399
--- Comment #6 from Alexander Monakov ---
Thanks. Any comment on having gimple lowering emit cleaner code in the first
place?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77399
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
OTOH sth like tree-complex.c for vectors would be nice as well (well, really
re-writing tree-vect-generic.c to sth better).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77399
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Note that this is a patten matching issue that could be quite easily fixed in
tree-ssa-forwprop.c:simplify_vector_constructor (which currently recognizes
a VEC_PERM but it should be easy to handle intermedia
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77399
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|SLP does not handle |Poor code generation for
17 matches
Mail list logo
