On 06/08/2017 11:07 AM, Jim Wilson wrote:
> I've got a testcase to add for this patch. Sorry about the delay, I
> took some time off to deal with a medical problem.
>
> This was tested with and without the extract_bit_field patch. The
> testcase fails without the patch and works with the patch.
I've got a testcase to add for this patch. Sorry about the delay, I
took some time off to deal with a medical problem.
This was tested with and without the extract_bit_field patch. The
testcase fails without the patch and works with the patch.
Jim
gcc/testsuite/
PR middle-end/79794
* gcc.tar
On 05/15/2017 05:46 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
The extra argument to extract_bit_field breaks builds for tilegx-linux-gnu
and tilepro-linux-gnu (as shown by my glibc bot); there are calls in those
back ends which haven't been updated.
I've got patches for the tile backends that I'll push today.
j
The extra argument to extract_bit_field breaks builds for tilegx-linux-gnu
and tilepro-linux-gnu (as shown by my glibc bot); there are calls in those
back ends which haven't been updated.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 7:01 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
> Explicitly passing the additional argument at all the call sites
> can be mitigated by giving the new alt_rtl argument a default
> value of NULL in the declarations of the extract_bit_field functions.
I keep forgetting about C++ features, as
On 05/04/2017 08:24 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 03/01/2017 03:06 PM, Jim Wilson wrote:
This is a proposed patch for the bug 79794 which I just submitted.
This isn't a regression, so this can wait for after the gcc 7 branch
if necessary.
The problem here is that a reg+offset MEM target is passed to
e
On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 7:24 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 03/01/2017 03:06 PM, Jim Wilson wrote:
> This seems fine to me. A testcase to add to the gcc.target testsuite would
> be useful, but I don't think it's strictly necessary.
Thanks for the review. It was 2 months since I posted it, so I
reteste
On 03/01/2017 03:06 PM, Jim Wilson wrote:
This is a proposed patch for the bug 79794 which I just submitted.
This isn't a regression, so this can wait for after the gcc 7 branch
if necessary.
The problem here is that a reg+offset MEM target is passed to
extract_bit_field with a vector register s
This is a proposed patch for the bug 79794 which I just submitted.
This isn't a regression, so this can wait for after the gcc 7 branch
if necessary.
The problem here is that a reg+offset MEM target is passed to
extract_bit_field with a vector register source. On aarch64, we have
an instruction f
