subject:"\[Bug target\/116615\] Investigate LOGICAL_OP_NON_SHORT

[Bug target/116615] Investigate LOGICAL_OP_NON_SHORT_CIRCUIT for RISC-V

2024-10-14 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116615 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |15.0

[Bug target/116615] Investigate LOGICAL_OP_NON_SHORT_CIRCUIT for RISC-V

2024-10-08 Thread law at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116615 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug target/116615] Investigate LOGICAL_OP_NON_SHORT_CIRCUIT for RISC-V

2024-10-08 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116615 --- Comment #14 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:34ae3a992a0cc3240d07d69ff12a664cbb5c8be0 commit r15-4173-g34ae3a992a0cc3240d07d69ff12a664cbb5c8be0 Author: Palmer Dabbelt Date: Tue

[Bug target/116615] Investigate LOGICAL_OP_NON_SHORT_CIRCUIT for RISC-V

2024-09-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116615 --- Comment #13 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #12) > *** Bug 106724 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** I forgot I had filed PR 106724 until I was looking for a different issue :).

[Bug target/116615] Investigate LOGICAL_OP_NON_SHORT_CIRCUIT for RISC-V

2024-09-24 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116615 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug target/116615] Investigate LOGICAL_OP_NON_SHORT_CIRCUIT for RISC-V

2024-09-05 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116615 --- Comment #11 from Richard Biener --- Note this now mostly controls early and gimple-time optimization, the expansion to RTL will use BRANCH_COST and friends to decide whether if (a | b) is expanded into one or two branches. LOGICAL_OP_NON_SH

[Bug target/116615] Investigate LOGICAL_OP_NON_SHORT_CIRCUIT for RISC-V

2024-09-05 Thread andrew at sifive dot com via Gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116615 Andrew Waterman changed: What|Removed |Added CC||andrew at sifive dot com --- Comment

[Bug target/116615] Investigate LOGICAL_OP_NON_SHORT_CIRCUIT for RISC-V

2024-09-05 Thread palmer at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116615 --- Comment #9 from Palmer Dabbelt --- (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #3) > FYI on LoongArch it's claimed LOGICAL_OP_NON_SHORT_CIRCUIT=0 mostly helps FP > benchmarks, something like > > /* { dg-options "-O2 -ffast-math -fdump-tree-gimple"

[Bug target/116615] Investigate LOGICAL_OP_NON_SHORT_CIRCUIT for RISC-V

2024-09-05 Thread palmer at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116615 --- Comment #8 from Palmer Dabbelt --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7) > History on LOGICAL_OP_NON_SHORT_CIRCUIT being able to defined differently > from BRANCH_COST. It was originally added for powerpc (2002/2003ish) which > had exp

[Bug target/116615] Investigate LOGICAL_OP_NON_SHORT_CIRCUIT for RISC-V

2024-09-05 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116615 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||internal-improvement,

[Bug target/116615] Investigate LOGICAL_OP_NON_SHORT_CIRCUIT for RISC-V

2024-09-05 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116615 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2024-09-05 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug target/116615] Investigate LOGICAL_OP_NON_SHORT_CIRCUIT for RISC-V

2024-09-05 Thread xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116615 --- Comment #5 from Xi Ruoyao --- (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #3) > I'm really not a fan of the change because without -ffast-math (which should > really not be used for 99.9% real-life code) the FP comparision isn't > allowed to be sho

[Bug target/116615] Investigate LOGICAL_OP_NON_SHORT_CIRCUIT for RISC-V

2024-09-05 Thread xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116615 --- Comment #4 from Xi Ruoyao --- (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #3) > FYI on LoongArch ... ... Note that I don't know if things are same or not on RISC-V.