On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 5:17 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 10:49 AM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 7:06 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 11:34 AM, Richard Biener
>>> wrote:
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:41 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 10:49 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 7:06 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 11:34 AM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:41 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
Hi,
For now, we check validity of offset by computing the maxi
On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 7:06 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 11:34 AM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:41 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> For now, we check validity of offset by computing the maximum offset then
>>> checking if
>>> offset is smaller than the
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 11:34 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:41 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
>> Hi,
>> For now, we check validity of offset by computing the maximum offset then
>> checking if
>> offset is smaller than the max offset. This is inaccurate, for example,
>> some tar
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:41 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
> For now, we check validity of offset by computing the maximum offset then
> checking if
> offset is smaller than the max offset. This is inaccurate, for example, some
> targets
> may require offset to be aligned by power of 2. This pat
