Hi Steve, This looks fine from the fortran side - especially since it involves removing checks :-)
Thanks Paul On 12 September 2017 at 18:34, Steve Ellcey <sell...@cavium.com> wrote: > Ping, also adding fort...@gcc.gnu.org which I seem to left out when > sending this to gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org. > > Steve > > > On Fri, 2017-08-25 at 09:46 -0700, Steve Ellcey wrote: >> My earlier patch to update tests and resolve PR tree- >> optimization/80925 >> did not include FORTRAN, just C and C++. This patch makes the same >> changes as the earlier patches but for FORTRAN. Tested on aarch64. >> >> OK to checkin? >> >> Steve Ellcey >> sell...@cavium.com >> >> Orginal patches/discussion is at: >> >> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-07/msg01862.html >> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-08/msg00000.html >> >> >> 2017-08-25 Steve Ellcey <sell...@cavium.com> >> >> PR tree-optimization/80925 >> * gfortran.dg/vect/vect-2.f90: Add >> --param vect-max-peeling-for-alignment=0 option. >> Remove unaligned access and peeling checks. >> * gfortran.dg/vect/vect-3.f90: Ditto. >> * gfortran.dg/vect/vect-4.f90: Ditto. >> * gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90: Ditto. >> -- "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough" - Albert Einstein
