I made a mistake defining fmin/fmax RTL patterns in r13-2085: I used
smin and smax in the definition mistakenly. This causes the optimizer
to perform constant folding as if fmin/fmax was "really" smin/smax
operations even with -fsignaling-nans. Then pr105414.c fails.
We don't have fmin/fmax RTL
Tested powerpc64le-linux, pushed to trunk.
-- >8 --
Add a simpler definition of std::__detected_or using concepts. This
also replaces the __detector::value_t member which should have been using
a reserved name.
Use __detected_or in pointer_traits.
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
* include/bit
On 9/23/22 12:43, Torbjörn SVENSSON via Gcc-patches wrote:
The "RISC-V specific attributes" section should be at the same level
as "PowerPC-specific attributes".
gcc/ChangeLog:
* doc/sourcebuild.texi: Fix chapter level.
OK
jeff
On 9/23/22 05:42, Tamar Christina wrote:
Hi All,
This adds a match.pd rule that can fold right shifts and bit_field_refs of
integers into just a bit_field_ref by adjusting the offset and the size of the
extract and adds an extend to the previous size.
Concretely turns:
#include
unsigned in
On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 4:43 AM Tamar Christina via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> This adds a match.pd rule that can fold right shifts and bit_field_refs of
> integers into just a bit_field_ref by adjusting the offset and the size of the
> extract and adds an extend to the previous size.
>
>
On 9/21/22 16:11, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Wed, Sep 7, 2022 at 10:03 AM Jeff Law via Gcc-patches
wrote:
On 9/2/2022 8:36 AM, H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches wrote:
CONCAT and CONCATN never appear in the insn chain. They are only used
in debug insn. Ignore debug insns with CONCAT and CONCATN for insn
sc
On 9/23/22 03:21, Tamar Christina wrote:
Hi All,
The following testcase:
int zoo1 (int a, int b, int c, int d)
{
return (a > b ? c : d) & 1;
}
gets de-optimized by the front-end since somewhere around GCC 4.x due to a fix
that was added to fold_binary_op_with_conditional_arg.
The foldin
On 9/18/22 02:47, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
On Fri, 09 Sep 2022 02:46:40 PDT (-0700), Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
I just happened to stuble on this one while trying to sort out the
RISC-V bits.
gcc/ChangeLog
* doc/tm.texi (TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION): Add 16.
---
gcc/doc/tm.texi | 2 +-
1 file chang
> On 23 Sep 2022, at 15:30, David Edelsohn via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 10:12 AM Thomas Neumann wrote:
>
>>>
>>>+static const bool in_shutdown = false;
>>>
>>> I'll let Jason or others decide if this is the right solution. It seems
>>> that in_shutdown also co
