Re: [PATCH] Fix builtin-arith-overflow-p-1[23].c on i686

2016-06-16 Thread Uros Bizjak
On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 12:39 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 11:51:12AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> Here is what I've committed to the trunk and 6.2 after bootstrap/regtest on >> x86_64-linux and i686-linux. >> For 5/4.9, this doesn't apply cleanly, as http://gcc.gnu.org/r22

Re: [PATCH] Fix builtin-arith-overflow-p-1[23].c on i686

2016-06-16 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 11:51:12AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Here is what I've committed to the trunk and 6.2 after bootstrap/regtest on > x86_64-linux and i686-linux. > For 5/4.9, this doesn't apply cleanly, as http://gcc.gnu.org/r222592 > aka https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-04/msg0193

Re: [PATCH] Fix builtin-arith-overflow-p-1[23].c on i686

2016-06-16 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 10:44:06PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote: > Please also change similar peephole2 pattern (that does a zext with an > and insn) a couple of patterns below the one you are changing. Here is what I've committed to the trunk and 6.2 after bootstrap/regtest on x86_64-linux and i686-l

Re: [PATCH] Fix builtin-arith-overflow-p-1[23].c on i686

2016-06-15 Thread Uros Bizjak
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 9:57 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > On the builtin-arith-overflow-p-1{2,3}.c testcases (posted earlier today) > i?86 miscompiles e.g. t111_4mul function. Before peephole2 we have: > (insn 9 6 50 2 (parallel [ > (set (reg:CCO 17 flags) > (eq:

[PATCH] Fix builtin-arith-overflow-p-1[23].c on i686

2016-06-15 Thread Jakub Jelinek
Hi! On the builtin-arith-overflow-p-1{2,3}.c testcases (posted earlier today) i?86 miscompiles e.g. t111_4mul function. Before peephole2 we have: (insn 9 6 50 2 (parallel [ (set (reg:CCO 17 flags) (eq:CCO (mult:DI (sign_extend:DI (reg/v:SI 0 ax [orig:90 x ] [90]))