On Fri, 2015-06-19 at 20:36 -0400, David Edelsohn wrote: > On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 6:35 PM, Bill Schmidt > <wschm...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65914 demonstrates that we > > fail to match vector predicates with pseudos that are in the virtual > > stack register range. The reduced test case provided with the bug > > report, when compiled for the C++14 standard, demonstrates that we need > > to be able to do this. This patch loosens the restriction for the > > vector predicates so that all pseudos are accepted. Thanks to Uli > > Weigand for his insights on this bug. > > > > As a side benefit, applying this patch fixes a number of libgomp tests > > that have been failing recently. > > > > Bootstrapped and tested on powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu with no > > regressions. Is this ok for trunk? After it burns in, I would propose > > to backport it to GCC 5.1 and GCC 4.9 (when the tree is open). > > > > Thanks, > > Bill > > > > > > [gcc] > > > > 2015-05-19 Bill Schmidt <wschm...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > > > * config/rs6000/predicates.md (altivec_register_operand): Permit > > virtual stack registers. > > (vsx_register_operand): Likewise. > > (vfloat_operand): Likewise. > > (vint_operand): Likewise. > > (vlogical_operand): Likewise. > > Okay. > > > [gcc/testsuite] > > > > 2015-05-19 Bill Schmidt <wschm...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > > > * g++.dg/torture/pr65419.C: New. > > Maybe you should ask Richi or Jakub about the testcase because you are > placing it in a non-target-specific location. It should succeed on > all targets, but it may expose latent bugs on other targets.
OK, thanks. Richi, Jakub, is this ok as a general C++ torture test? Thanks, Bill > > Thanks, David >
