On 05/17/2016 06:09 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> The patch is ok.
>
Committed as r236344.
--
Regards,
Mikhail Maltsev
On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 4:05 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Tue, 17 May 2016, Richard Biener wrote:
>
>> On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 3:36 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, 13 May 2016, Mikhail Maltsev wrote:
>>>
> I don't know if we might want some :c / single_use restrictions, maybe
> on
>
On Tue, 17 May 2016, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 3:36 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016, Mikhail Maltsev wrote:
I don't know if we might want some :c / single_use restrictions, maybe on
the
outer convert and the rshift/rotate.
I don't think :c can be used here.
On 05/17/2016 04:39 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> Are you sure narrowing conversions are valid for rotates?
>
> (char)short_var < byte.
>
Yes, but the transformation leaves conversions as-is. Only bit_not is removed.
--
Regards,
Mikhail Maltsev
On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 3:36 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Fri, 13 May 2016, Mikhail Maltsev wrote:
>
>>> I don't know if we might want some :c / single_use restrictions, maybe on
>>> the
>>> outer convert and the rshift/rotate.
>>>
>> I don't think :c can be used here.
>
>
> Oups, typo for :s.
>
>>
On Fri, 13 May 2016, Mikhail Maltsev wrote:
I don't know if we might want some :c / single_use restrictions, maybe on the
outer convert and the rshift/rotate.
I don't think :c can be used here.
Oups, typo for :s.
As for :s, I added it, as you suggested.
:s will be ignored when there is n
On 05/11/2016 10:52 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> +/* ~((~X) >> Y) -> X >> Y (for arithmetic shift). */
> +(simplify
> + (bit_not (convert? (rshift (bit_not @0) @1)))
> + (if (!TYPE_UNSIGNED (TREE_TYPE (@0))
> + && TYPE_PRECISION (type) <= TYPE_PRECISION (TREE_TYPE (@0)))
> + (convert (rshift
On Tue, 10 May 2016, Mikhail Maltsev wrote:
On 05/08/2016 10:57 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Sun, 8 May 2016, Mikhail Maltsev wrote:
Hi!
I decided to revive this patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-06/msg00999.html.
I addressed review comments about sign conversions. Bootstrapped and
On 05/08/2016 10:57 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Sun, 8 May 2016, Mikhail Maltsev wrote:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> I decided to revive this patch:
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-06/msg00999.html.
>> I addressed review comments about sign conversions. Bootstrapped and
>> regtested
>> on x86_64-lin
On Sun, 8 May 2016, Mikhail Maltsev wrote:
Hi!
I decided to revive this patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-06/msg00999.html.
I addressed review comments about sign conversions. Bootstrapped and regtested
on x86_64-linux-gnu {,-m32}. OK for trunk?
Hello,
are you sure that your tra
Hi!
I decided to revive this patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-06/msg00999.html.
I addressed review comments about sign conversions. Bootstrapped and regtested
on x86_64-linux-gnu {,-m32}. OK for trunk?
--
Regards,
Mikhail Maltsev
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-05-08 Mikhail M
11 matches
Mail list logo
