http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51390
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51469
Bug #: 51469
Summary: attr-ifunc-* tests fail on PowerPC if
--enable-gnu-indirect-function is used
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UN
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41701
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51469
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41787
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48258
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40348
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46041
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51623
--- Comment #2 from Michael Meissner 2011-12-28
18:02:56 UTC ---
Author: meissner
Date: Wed Dec 28 18:02:49 2011
New Revision: 182710
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182710
Log:
Fix PR 51623
Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/
||meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution||FIXED
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
--- Comment #3 from Michael Meissner 2011-12-28
18:04:03 UTC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51623
--- Comment #4 from Michael Meissner 2011-12-28
20:53:33 UTC ---
Author: meissner
Date: Wed Dec 28 20:53:30 2011
New Revision: 182712
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182712
Log:
Backport PR 51623 change
Added:
branches
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50988
--- Comment #2 from Michael Meissner 2011-12-28
22:30:22 UTC ---
Created attachment 26197
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26197
Proposed patch
Please check this patch on the spe compiler.
||2011-12-28
CC||meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50988
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #3 from Michael Me
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50988
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51702
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51702
Bug #: 51702
Summary: Several of the vector tests in gcc.dg fail on
powerpc-linux in 32-bit mode
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51623
--- Comment #5 from Michael Meissner 2011-12-29
21:13:15 UTC ---
Author: meissner
Date: Thu Dec 29 21:13:10 2011
New Revision: 182731
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182731
Log:
Update PR 51623, to eliminate checks against
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89213
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89213
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner ---
Created attachment 45611
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45611&action=edit
Proposed patch to fix the problem
This patch adds combiner insns to match attempted vector long long shifts
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89213
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89213
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #45611|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89213
--- Comment #3 from Michael Meissner ---
The vector shift sequence does not appear in Spec 2006 CPU compiled for power9.
The vector shift sequence does appear 4 times in the 602_gcc_s benchmark, and
once in the 683_imagick_s benchmark.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89213
--- Comment #5 from Michael Meissner ---
Sure I could use XXSPLTIB all of the time if I limit the optimization to ISA
3.0 (power9). I was trying to add optimization for shift counts for 1..15 on
ISA 2.07 (power8) as well, hence using VSPLTISW fo
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
If you switch the default long double type to IEEE 128-bit
(-mabi=ieeelongdouble), the GCC compiler will crash.
Using this code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
When I was working on PR target/85075, I noticed the big endian version of the
compiler would not build
||2018-04-16
CC||dje at gcc dot gnu.org,
||meissner at gcc dot gnu.org,
||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85424
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Tue Apr 17 18:22:08 2018
New Revision: 259441
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259441&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-04-17 Michael Meissner
PR target/85424
* co
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
When we switch the default long double type, we call the wrong function for
__builtin_powil (i.e. we call __powitf2, when
||2018-04-18
CC||dje at gcc dot gnu.org,
||meissner at gcc dot gnu.org,
||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85440
--- Comment #13 from Michael Meissner ---
You can use --with-cpu=power7 as well. But if you only have power8 systems, it
is better to use --with-cpu=power8. The little endian PowerPC Linux systems
have a minimum cpu base level of power8, so flo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85440
--- Comment #20 from Michael Meissner ---
I'm sorry long double doesn't seem to work on your system. If your system does
not have the appropriate long double libraries, you probably need to use the
--with-long-double-64 option to make long doubl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85456
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Fri Apr 20 21:27:08 2018
New Revision: 259533
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259533&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[libgcc]
2018-04-20 Michael Meissner
PR target/85456
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85456
--- Comment #2 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Fri Apr 20 22:36:48 2018
New Revision: 259534
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=259534&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[libgcc]
2018-04-20 Michael Meissner
PR target/85456
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85456
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Part of the issue with PR target/85075 is that the __ibm128 type was
implemented internally as long double, when the
||2018-05-04
CC||dje at gcc dot gnu.org,
||meissner at gcc dot gnu.org,
||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
erity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
If you compile the following code for -mcpu=power8 or -mcpu=power9, it wants to
generate a PRE_INC loop. However, th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85657
--- Comment #2 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Mon May 21 22:21:40 2018
New Revision: 260489
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260489&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2018-05-21 Michael Meissner
PR target/85657
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85657
--- Comment #3 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Mon May 21 22:25:03 2018
New Revision: 260490
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260490&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-05-21 Michael Meissner
PR target/85657
* co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85657
--- Comment #4 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Wed Jun 6 21:11:15 2018
New Revision: 261246
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=261246&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2018-06-06 Michael Meissner
* config/rs6000/rs6000
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85657
--- Comment #5 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Wed Jun 6 22:54:17 2018
New Revision: 261253
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=261253&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2018-06-06 Michael Meissner
PR target/85657
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
PowerPC with the VSX instruction set has the xststdcdp instruction that can be
used to test if a value is infinity (and the xststdcqp instruction for IEEE
128-bit). We should use this for
Priority: P3
Component: other
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
I was tracking down a bug in PowerPC with isnormal, and I noticed we don't have
optab support for doing either the isnorm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85358
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Mon Jun 18 19:10:08 2018
New Revision: 261712
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=261712&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2018-06-18 Michael Meissner
PR target/85358
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85657
--- Comment #6 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Fri Jun 22 14:07:11 2018
New Revision: 261890
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=261890&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2018-06-22 Michael Meissner
Back port from trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85657
--- Comment #7 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Fri Jun 22 14:11:56 2018
New Revision: 261891
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=261891&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2018-06-22 Michael Meissner
Back port from trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85358
--- Comment #2 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Fri Jun 22 14:19:45 2018
New Revision: 261893
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=261893&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2018-06-22 Michael Meissner
Back port from trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85657
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85358
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85075
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85424
--- Comment #2 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Mon Jun 25 23:28:27 2018
New Revision: 262122
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262122&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-06-25 Michael Meissner
Back port from trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85424
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 44339
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86367
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner ---
Created attachment 44340
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44340&action=edit
Ealias tree pass (pass before FRE1)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86367
--- Comment #2 from Michael Meissner ---
Created attachment 44341
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44341&action=edit
Fre1 tree pass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86367
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86367
--- Comment #3 from Michael Meissner ---
BTW, I compiled the same code on the x86 with both -mlong-double-80 and
-mlong-double-128 options, and FRE1 deletes the code, but returns 0 instead of
calling abort.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86367
--- Comment #4 from Michael Meissner ---
If I change the __builtin_nanq calls to __builtin_nanl and the __builtin_nansq
calls to __builtin_nansl when __float128 and long double use the same type, the
test works fine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86367
--- Comment #5 from Michael Meissner ---
Created attachment 44342
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44342&action=edit
Patch to map 'q' builtins to 'l' instead of 'f128'
This patch 'fixes' the problem by changing the __builtin_
ormal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
I was trying to adjust the length calculation in the PowerPC to deal with the
new prefixed addressing that a future machine
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81959
--- Comment #3 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Mon Dec 11 18:54:55 2017
New Revision: 255545
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255545&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2017-12-11 Michael Meissner
Back port from trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82748
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
TFmode (and TCmode) in rs6000.c is tuned for IBM extended double. With the
-mabi=ieeelongdouble option which switches long
-linux
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |meissner at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Build||powerpc64le-linux,
||powerpc64-linux
Severity|normal
||2018-01-16
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |meissner at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner ---
The issue is signbit for 128-bit floating point types wants to optimize signbit
coming
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83815
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81959
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83862
--- Comment #2 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Mon Jan 22 19:36:18 2018
New Revision: 256959
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256959&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2018-01-22 Michael Meissner
PR target/83862
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83862
--- Comment #3 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Tue Jan 23 15:07:00 2018
New Revision: 256987
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256987&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2018-01-23 Michael Meissner
Back port from trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83862
--- Comment #4 from Michael Meissner ---
GCC 6 backport applied, GCC 7 backport waiting for GCC 7.3 to ship, before
applying the patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81550
--- Comment #3 from Michael Meissner ---
It isn't actually subversion id 250482 that causes the problem. I've built
250481 and 250483 compilers and there is no difference in code. I had 252844,
and it shows the problem.
The difference between
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81550
--- Comment #4 from Michael Meissner ---
I must have typed the wrong numbers, as revision 250482 is indeed the revision
that it breaks.
|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |meissner at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81550
--- Comment #6 from Michael Meissner ---
This is a twisty little passage (all different).
The code is basically trying to test the TARGET_ASM_LOOP_ALIGN_MAX_SKIP target
hook. It carefully aligns the functions to 16 bytes and then wants the norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81550
--- Comment #7 from Michael Meissner ---
I think the thing to do is make a shorter loop that won't get extended like the
double loop does.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81550
--- Comment #9 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Thu Jan 25 01:09:19 2018
New Revision: 257038
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257038&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc/testsuite]
2018-01-24 Michael Meissner
PR target/81
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81550
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83862
--- Comment #5 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Thu Jan 25 17:36:47 2018
New Revision: 257060
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257060&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2018-01-25 Michael Meissner
Back port from trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83862
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
ormal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
This is a follow-on to PR target/81550.
In that bug, the following code generated more code. That in turn caused the
test to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81550
--- Comment #11 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Mon Jan 29 22:30:34 2018
New Revision: 257166
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257166&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-01-29 Michael Meissner
PR target/81550
* c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84042
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
In preparing to close target/79038, I decided to run some tests. I discovered
that both GCC 8 and GCC 7 regress
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84154
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner ---
Created attachment 43310
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43310&action=edit
Example code to show the problem.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79038
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70589
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84154
--- Comment #2 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Tue Feb 6 20:15:40 2018
New Revision: 257429
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257429&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-02-06 Michael Meissner
PR target/84154
* co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84154
--- Comment #3 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Wed Feb 7 22:54:59 2018
New Revision: 257470
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257470&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2018-02-07 Michael Meissner
PR target/84154
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84154
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84154
--- Comment #7 from Michael Meissner ---
Yes both patches need to be backported to GCC 7.
The first patch also needs to be backported to GCC 6. The second one does not.
,
||powerpc64-gnu-linux
CC||dje at gcc dot gnu.org,
||meissner at gcc dot gnu.org,
||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
I was looking at the Spec 2017 imagick benchmark, and in particular at the hot
function in enhance.c.
The code
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
When I first added the patterns for LFIWAX and LFIWZX instructions (back in
2010), I wanted to add support for these instructions, but at the time we
didn't have automatic
IRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
I was working on the patch to temporarily disable -mpcrel in GCC 10 until the
full pc-relative support is in
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
For power7/power8 code generation, we should generate better code for splatting
a SFmode value from memory.
Consider the code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90822
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90822
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from Michael
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
In bug 90822, I opened the bug to clean up some old code.
This bug is separated from that bug, to track the original issue
201 - 300 of 1289 matches
Mail list logo
