2015-01-25 Christophe Lyon
* gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/arm-neon-ref.h
(_ARM_FPSRC): Add DN and AHP fields.
(clean_results): Force DN=1 on AArch64.
* gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/binary_op_no64.inc: New file.
* gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-int
On 26 January 2015 at 14:23, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> On 26 January 2015 at 13:10, Tejas Belagod wrote:
>> On 25/01/15 21:05, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>>>
>>> On 23 January 2015 at 14:44, Christophe Lyon
>>> wrote:
On 23 January 2015 at 12:42, Christophe Lyon
wrote:
>
> On
On 26 January 2015 at 13:10, Tejas Belagod wrote:
> On 25/01/15 21:05, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>>
>> On 23 January 2015 at 14:44, Christophe Lyon
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 23 January 2015 at 12:42, Christophe Lyon
>>> wrote:
On 23 January 2015 at 11:18, Tejas Belagod
wrote:
>
>
On 25/01/15 21:05, Christophe Lyon wrote:
On 23 January 2015 at 14:44, Christophe Lyon wrote:
On 23 January 2015 at 12:42, Christophe Lyon wrote:
On 23 January 2015 at 11:18, Tejas Belagod wrote:
On 22/01/15 21:31, Christophe Lyon wrote:
On 22 January 2015 at 16:22, Tejas Belagod wrote:
On 23 January 2015 at 14:44, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> On 23 January 2015 at 12:42, Christophe Lyon
> wrote:
>> On 23 January 2015 at 11:18, Tejas Belagod wrote:
>>> On 22/01/15 21:31, Christophe Lyon wrote:
On 22 January 2015 at 16:22, Tejas Belagod wrote:
>
> On 22/01/15 14:
On 23 January 2015 at 12:42, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> On 23 January 2015 at 11:18, Tejas Belagod wrote:
>> On 22/01/15 21:31, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>>>
>>> On 22 January 2015 at 16:22, Tejas Belagod wrote:
On 22/01/15 14:28, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>
>
> On 22 January 2015
On 23 January 2015 at 11:18, Tejas Belagod wrote:
> On 22/01/15 21:31, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>>
>> On 22 January 2015 at 16:22, Tejas Belagod wrote:
>>>
>>> On 22/01/15 14:28, Christophe Lyon wrote:
On 22 January 2015 at 12:19, Tejas Belagod
wrote:
>
>
> On 21/01
On 22/01/15 21:31, Christophe Lyon wrote:
On 22 January 2015 at 16:22, Tejas Belagod wrote:
On 22/01/15 14:28, Christophe Lyon wrote:
On 22 January 2015 at 12:19, Tejas Belagod wrote:
On 21/01/15 15:07, Christophe Lyon wrote:
On 19 January 2015 at 17:54, Marcus Shawcroft
wrote:
On 1
On 22 January 2015 at 16:22, Tejas Belagod wrote:
> On 22/01/15 14:28, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>>
>> On 22 January 2015 at 12:19, Tejas Belagod wrote:
>>>
>>> On 21/01/15 15:07, Christophe Lyon wrote:
On 19 January 2015 at 17:54, Marcus Shawcroft
wrote:
>
>
> On 19
On 22/01/15 14:28, Christophe Lyon wrote:
On 22 January 2015 at 12:19, Tejas Belagod wrote:
On 21/01/15 15:07, Christophe Lyon wrote:
On 19 January 2015 at 17:54, Marcus Shawcroft
wrote:
On 19 January 2015 at 15:43, Christophe Lyon
wrote:
On 19 January 2015 at 14:29, Marcus Shawcroft
w
On 22 January 2015 at 12:19, Tejas Belagod wrote:
> On 21/01/15 15:07, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>>
>> On 19 January 2015 at 17:54, Marcus Shawcroft
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 19 January 2015 at 15:43, Christophe Lyon
>>> wrote:
On 19 January 2015 at 14:29, Marcus Shawcroft
wrote:
>
>
On 21/01/15 15:07, Christophe Lyon wrote:
On 19 January 2015 at 17:54, Marcus Shawcroft
wrote:
On 19 January 2015 at 15:43, Christophe Lyon wrote:
On 19 January 2015 at 14:29, Marcus Shawcroft
wrote:
On 16 January 2015 at 17:52, Christophe Lyon wrote:
OK provided, as per the previous cou
On 19 January 2015 at 17:54, Marcus Shawcroft
wrote:
> On 19 January 2015 at 15:43, Christophe Lyon
> wrote:
>> On 19 January 2015 at 14:29, Marcus Shawcroft
>> wrote:
>>> On 16 January 2015 at 17:52, Christophe Lyon
>>> wrote:
>>>
> OK provided, as per the previous couple, that we don;t
On 19 January 2015 at 15:43, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> On 19 January 2015 at 14:29, Marcus Shawcroft
> wrote:
>> On 16 January 2015 at 17:52, Christophe Lyon
>> wrote:
>>
OK provided, as per the previous couple, that we don;t regression or
introduce new fails on aarch64[_be] or aarch32
On 19 January 2015 at 14:29, Marcus Shawcroft
wrote:
> On 16 January 2015 at 17:52, Christophe Lyon
> wrote:
>
>>> OK provided, as per the previous couple, that we don;t regression or
>>> introduce new fails on aarch64[_be] or aarch32.
>>
>> This patch shows failures on aarch64 and aarch64_be fo
On 16 January 2015 at 17:52, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>> OK provided, as per the previous couple, that we don;t regression or
>> introduce new fails on aarch64[_be] or aarch32.
>
> This patch shows failures on aarch64 and aarch64_be for vmax and vmin
> when the input is -NaN.
> It's a corner case,
On 16 January 2015 at 18:14, Marcus Shawcroft
wrote:
> On 16 January 2015 at 16:21, Christophe Lyon
> wrote:
>
>> My existing tests only cover armv7 so far.
>> I do plan to expand them once they are all in GCC.
>>
>>> Otherwise, they look good to me(but I can't approve it).
>>>
>>> Tejas.
>>>
>
On 16 January 2015 at 16:21, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> My existing tests only cover armv7 so far.
> I do plan to expand them once they are all in GCC.
>
>> Otherwise, they look good to me(but I can't approve it).
>>
>> Tejas.
>>
OK provided, as per the previous couple, that we don;t regression or
On 16 January 2015 at 14:56, Tejas Belagod wrote:
>> +#ifndef NO_FLOAT_VARIANT
>> + VLOAD(vector, buffer, , float, f, 32, 2);
>> + VLOAD(vector, buffer, q, float, f, 32, 4);
>> +#endif
>>
>
>>
>> +#ifndef NO_FLOAT_VARIANT
>> + VDUP(vector2, , float, f, 32, 2, -15.5f);
>> + VDUP(vector2, q
+#ifndef NO_FLOAT_VARIANT
+ VLOAD(vector, buffer, , float, f, 32, 2);
+ VLOAD(vector, buffer, q, float, f, 32, 4);
+#endif
+#ifndef NO_FLOAT_VARIANT
+ VDUP(vector2, , float, f, 32, 2, -15.5f);
+ VDUP(vector2, q, float, f, 32, 4, -14.5f);
+#endif
+
+#ifndef NO_FLOAT_VARIANT
+#define FLO
* gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/binary_op_no64.inc: New file.
* gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/vhadd.c: New file.
* gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/vhsub.c: New file.
* gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/vmax.c: New file.
* gcc.target/
21 matches
Mail list logo
