Hi again,
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 07:59:30PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > (the two compares were combined, by fwprop1) but without the flag we get
> >
> > fcmpo 5,1,2
> > li 3,-1
> > bltlr 5
> > mfcr 3,4
> > rlwinm 3,3,22,1
> > fcmpo 7,1,2
> >
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 7:20 PM, Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 09:30:35AM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>> +(define_insn "*cmpdd_cmpo"
>> + [(set (match_operand:CCFP 0 "cc_reg_operand" "=y")
>> + (compare:CCFP (match_operand:DD 1 "gpc_reg_operand" "d")
>> + (match_o
Hi!
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 09:30:35AM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> +(define_insn "*cmpdd_cmpo"
> + [(set (match_operand:CCFP 0 "cc_reg_operand" "=y")
> + (compare:CCFP (match_operand:DD 1 "gpc_reg_operand" "d")
> + (match_operand:DD 2 "gpc_reg_operand" "d")))
> + (unspec [(match_dup 1) (ma
Hello!
+(define_insn "*cmpdd_cmpo"
+ [(set (match_operand:CCFP 0 "cc_reg_operand" "=y")
+ (compare:CCFP (match_operand:DD 1 "gpc_reg_operand" "d")
+ (match_operand:DD 2 "gpc_reg_operand" "d")))
+ (unspec [(match_dup 1) (match_dup 2)] UNSPEC_CMPO)]
+ "TARGET_DFP"
+ "dcmpo %0,%1,%2"
+ [(s
This implements ordered comparisons for most floating point variants.
It does not yet implement it for XL-compatible FP comparisons.
I do not yet know if it works correctly for emulated 128-bit IEEE FP.
There should not be performance impact, but I haven't tested it
thoroughly yet.
Segher
