MAINTAINERS: Change my contact email in MAINTAINERS file.
* MAINTAINERS: Changing my email to gnu email.
Best wishes,
Navid.
0001-MAINTAINERS-Change-my-contact-email-in-MAINTAINERS-f.patch
Description: Binary data
ot present in gcc_release right now.
I tested the script on x86_64 Linux.
Adding GIT_CUSTOMREPO parameters to gcc_release script.
* maintainer-scripts/gcc_release
Best wishes,
Navid.From 730fef2cfd589b58e5f16ae765518754af3766b8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Navid Rahimi
Date: W
Jelinek
Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2022 8:46:09 AM
To: Richard Biener ; Jeff Law
Cc: Navid Rahimi ; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [PATCH] testsuite: Fix up tree-ssa/pr103514.c testcase
[PR103514]
[You don't often get email from ja...@redhat.com. Learn why this is importan
) == (a ^ b) -> !(a | b): New optimization.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr103514.c: Testcase for this optimization.
1) https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103514
Best wishes,
Navid.From 7bc34478cc3a494bb634625281b5f03e43f210a9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Navid Rahimi
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2021
MAINTAINERS: Add myself to write after approval and DCO sections.
* MAINTAINERS: Adding myself.
Best wishes,
Navid.
0001-MAINTAINERS-Add-myself-to-write-after-approval-and-D.patch
Description: 0001-MAINTAINERS-Add-myself-to-write-after-approval-and-D.patch
h I will
keep the approach and will restrict it to bool types only).
1) https://compiler-explorer.com/z/h7hcohY74
2) https://eel.is/c++draft/conv.prom#6
Best wishes,
Navid.
From: Marc Glisse
Sent: Saturday, December 4, 2021 13:22
To: gcc-patches@
Hi GCC community,
This patch will add the missed pattern described in bug 103514 [1] to the
match.pd. Tested on x86_64 Linux.
tree-optimization/103514 Missing XOR-EQ-AND Optimization
* match.pd (a & b) == (a ^ b) -> !(a | b): New optimization.
* match.pd (a & b) ^ (a == b) -> !
, November 30, 2021 15:18
To: Navid Rahimi
Cc: Navid Rahimi via Gcc-patches
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH] tree-optimization/98956 Optimizing out
boolean left shift
On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 3:08 PM Navid Rahimi wrote:
>
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Thanks for your detailed comment. There are t
orrect me.
1) https://compiler-explorer.com/z/r46znh4Tj
2) https://compiler-explorer.com/z/K1so39dbK
3) https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/-54zZv
Best wishes,
Navid.
From: Andrew Pinski
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2021 14:03
To: Navid Rahimi
Cc: Navid Rahimi via Gc
Hi GCC community,
This patch will add the missed pattern described in bug 98956 [1] to the
match.pd. The codegen and correctness proof for this pattern is here [2,3] in
case anyone is curious. Tested on x86_64 Linux.
Tree-optimization/98956:
Adding new optimization to match.pd:
om: Jeff Law
Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2021 12:03
To: Navid Rahimi; Andrew Pinski
Cc: Navid Rahimi via Gcc-patches
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH][WIP] PR tree-optimization/101808 Boolean
comparison simplification
On 11/23/2021 12:55 PM, Navid Rahimi wrote:
>> Did you test Ada with
:02
To: Navid Rahimi; Navid Rahimi via Gcc-patches
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH][WIP] PR tree-optimization/101808 Boolean
comparison simplification
On 11/23/2021 12:42 PM, Navid Rahimi wrote:
> In case of x86_64. This is the code:
>
> src_1(bool, bool):
> cmp dil, s
o check whether it is canonical boolean type or
signed/unsigned, which should prevent messing with odd Boolean types in Ada.
Best wishes,
Navid.
From: Andrew Pinski
Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2021 11:33
To: Jeff Law
Cc: Navid Rahimi; Navid Rahimi vi
tures-optimization-manual.pdf
Best wishes,
Navid.
From: Jeff Law
Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2021 11:14
To: Navid Rahimi; Navid Rahimi via Gcc-patches
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH][WIP] PR tree-optimization/101808 Boolean
comparison simplification
On 11/23/20
Hi GCC community,
I wanted you take a quick look at this patch to solve this bug [1]. This is the
code example for the optimization [2] which does include a link to proof of
each different optimization.
I think it should be possible to use simpler approach than what Andrew has used
here [3].
Thanks Jeff for this too.
Best wishes,
Navid.
From: Jeff Law
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2021 19:09
To: Richard Biener; Navid Rahimi
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH] PR tree-optimization/102232 Adding a
missing pattern to
Thanks Jeff.
Best wishes,
Navid.
From: Jeff Law
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2021 16:48
To: Richard Biener; Navid Rahimi
Cc: Navid Rahimi via Gcc-patches
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH] PR tree-optimization/96779 Adding a missing
pattern to match.pd
ishes,
Navid.
From: Richard Biener
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2021 03:43
To: Navid Rahimi
Cc: Navid Rahimi via Gcc-patches
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH] PR tree-optimization/96779 Adding a missing
pattern to match.pd
[You don't often get email f
Hi GCC community,
This patch will add the missed pattern described in bug 102232 [1] to the
match.pd.
Tree-optimization/96779: Adding new optimization to match.pd:
* match.pd (-x == x) -> (x == 0): New optimization.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr96779.c: testcase for this optimiz
a;
Then you have to have at least -O1 to have it optimized. Granted, I am not
doing that in the testcase. In the new patch I am changing it to -O. Let me
know if you have any suggestions.
Best wishes,
Navid.
From: Richard Biener
Sent: Tuesday, November
behalf of Navid Rahimi via Gcc-patches
Sent: Monday, November 8, 2021 20:11
To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [PATCH] PR tree-optimization/102232 Adding a missing
pattern to match.pd
Hi GCC community,
This patch will add the missed pattern described in bug 102232 [1] to the
Hi GCC community,
This patch will add the missed pattern described in bug 102232 [1] to the
match.pd. The testcase will test whether the multiplication and division has
been removed from the code or not. The correctness proof for this pattern is
here [2] in case anyone is curious.
PR tree-opti
22 matches
Mail list logo
