On 2023-04-14 17:09, Kewen.Lin wrote:
Hi Jeff,
on 2023/4/14 16:01, guojiufu wrote:
On 2023-04-14 15:30, Jiufu Guo wrote:
Hi,
As PR108809 mentioned, vec_xl_len_r and vec_xst_len_r are tested
in gcc.target/powerpc/builtins-5-p9-runnable.c.
The vector operand of these two bifs are different from
Hi Jeff,
on 2023/4/14 16:01, guojiufu wrote:
> On 2023-04-14 15:30, Jiufu Guo wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> As PR108809 mentioned, vec_xl_len_r and vec_xst_len_r are tested
>> in gcc.target/powerpc/builtins-5-p9-runnable.c.
>> The vector operand of these two bifs are different from the view
>> of v16_int8 b
On 2023-04-14 15:30, Jiufu Guo wrote:
Hi,
As PR108809 mentioned, vec_xl_len_r and vec_xst_len_r are tested
in gcc.target/powerpc/builtins-5-p9-runnable.c.
The vector operand of these two bifs are different from the view
of v16_int8 between BE and LE, even it is same from the view of
128bits(uint
Hi,
As PR108809 mentioned, vec_xl_len_r and vec_xst_len_r are tested
in gcc.target/powerpc/builtins-5-p9-runnable.c.
The vector operand of these two bifs are different from the view
of v16_int8 between BE and LE, even it is same from the view of
128bits(uint128/V1TI).
The test case gcc.target/p
