Hi Martin & Richard,
>> A further improvement worth considering (if you're so inclined :)
>> is replacing the pcom_worker vec members with auto_vec (obviating
>> having to explicitly release them) and for the same reason also
>> replacing the comp_ptrs bare pointer members with auto_vecs.
>> There
On Sun, Jul 18, 2021 at 11:21 PM Kewen.Lin via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> This patch follows Martin's suggestion here[1], to support
> range-based for loops for traversing loops, analogously to
> the patch for vec[2].
>
> Bootstrapped and regtested on powerpc64le-linux-gnu P9,
> x86_64-redhat-
Hi,
This patch follows Martin's suggestion here[1], to support
range-based for loops for traversing loops, analogously to
the patch for vec[2].
Bootstrapped and regtested on powerpc64le-linux-gnu P9,
x86_64-redhat-linux and aarch64-linux-gnu, also
bootstrapped on ppc64le P9 with bootstrap-O3 conf
Ping.
On Sun, 2021-07-11 at 01:48 +0800, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
> We are comparing enum values (in wide_int) to check ODR violation.
> However, if we compare two wide_int values with different precision,
> we'll trigger an assert, leading to ICE. With enum-base introduced
> in C++11, it's easy to sink
Hi,
Gentle ping this:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-July/574503.html
Thanks.
On 6/7/2021 上午 11:11, HAO CHEN GUI wrote:
Hi
The patch changed matching conditions in pr81384.c and pr56605.c.
The original conditions failed to match due to mode promotion disabled.
The
Hi,
Gentle ping this:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-July/575036.html
Thanks
On 13/7/2021 上午 9:38, HAO CHEN GUI wrote:
Hi,
I refined the patch according to Segher's advice. Is this okay for
trunk? Any recommendations? Thanks a lot.
On 6/7/2021 上午 11:01, HAO CHEN GU
On Sun, 18 Jul 2021, Roger Sayle wrote:
+(if (GIMPLE || !TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS (@0))
I don't think you need to worry about that, the general genmatch machinery
is already supposed to take care of it. All the existing cases in match.pd
are about cond_expr, where counting the occurrences of ea
I tried to improve the patch following your advices and to catch more
opportunities. Hope it'll be helpful.
On 6/24/21 8:29 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 11:55 AM Di Zhao via Gcc-patches patc...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>
> I have some reservations about extending the ad-hoc "
On Sun, Jul 18, 2021 at 3:40 AM H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> For -mgeneral-regs-only, enable the GPR only instructions which are
> enabled implicitly by SSE ISAs unless they have been disabled explicitly.
>
> gcc/
>
> PR target/101492
> * common/config/i386/i386-common.c (ix86_handle_option)
On Sun, Jul 18, 2021 at 6:47 PM H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> Don't issue vzeroupper before function call if callee returns AVX
> register since callee must be compiled with AVX.
>
> gcc/
>
> PR target/101495
> * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_check_avx_upper_stores): Moved before
> ix86_av
Don't issue vzeroupper before function call if callee returns AVX
register since callee must be compiled with AVX.
gcc/
PR target/101495
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_check_avx_upper_stores): Moved before
ix86_avx_u128_mode_needed.
(ix86_avx_u128_mode_needed): Return
This patch to match.pd implements several closely related folding
simplifications at the tree-level, that make use of the property
that bit permutation functions, rotate and bswap have inverses.
[1] bswap(X) eq/ne C, for constant C, simplifies to X eq/ne C'
where C'=bswap(C), generaliz
On Jul 18 2021, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 17, 2021 at 03:13:59PM -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>> On Sat, Jul 17, 2021 at 2:31 PM Segher Boessenkool
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 11:35:25AM -0700, apinski--- via Gcc-patches wrote:
>> > > --- a/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
>> > > +
On Sat, Jul 17, 2021 at 03:13:59PM -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 17, 2021 at 2:31 PM Segher Boessenkool
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 11:35:25AM -0700, apinski--- via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > > --- a/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
> > > +++ b/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
> > > @@ -5799,7 +579
14 matches
Mail list logo
