https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115659
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115659
--- Comment #14 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Kewen Lin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f7e4000397842671fe7e5c0473f1fa62707e1db9
commit r15-1991-gf7e4000397842671fe7e5c0473f1fa62707e1db9
Author: Kewen Lin
Date: Fri Jul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115659
--- Comment #12 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Kewen Lin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f379596e0ba99df249d6e8b3f2e66edfcea916fe
commit r15-1890-gf379596e0ba99df249d6e8b3f2e66edfcea916fe
Author: Kewen Lin
Date: Mon Jul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115659
--- Comment #13 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Kewen Lin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6425dae07aa4be58abade03455c2d9744f73d4e1
commit r15-1891-g6425dae07aa4be58abade03455c2d9744f73d4e1
Author: Kewen Lin
Date: Mon Jul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115659
--- Comment #11 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Kewen Lin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:56670281c6db19d75c7b63e38971ab84681b245c
commit r15-1763-g56670281c6db19d75c7b63e38971ab84681b245c
Author: Kewen Lin
Date: Tue Jul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115659
--- Comment #10 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #9)
> I think the inversion code wants to check invert_tree_comparison and see if
> the inverted compare is supported and only if not fall back to inverting the
> compar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115659
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
I think the inversion code wants to check invert_tree_comparison and see if
the inverted compare is supported and only if not fall back to inverting the
comparison result (there is of course the multi-use c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115659
--- Comment #8 from Kewen Lin ---
Inspired by Andrew's comments, it looks we can have:
c = x CMP y
r = c ? 0 : z => r = ~c & z (1)
r = c ? z : 0 => r = c & z (2)
r = c ? -1 : z => r = c | z (3)
r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115659
--- Comment #7 from Kewen Lin ---
> > > (simplify
> > > (vec_cond @0 @1 integer_all_ones_p)
> > > (bit_ior (view_convert @0) @1))
> > > ```
> >
> > Missing negate for the vector one?
>
> No because vector true is already -1 :).
I could be w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115659
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #5)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> > Note I think this could help scalar code too:
> > ```
> > int a[1], b[1], c[1];
> >
> > void
> > test (void)
> > {
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115659
--- Comment #5 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> Note I think this could help scalar code too:
> ```
> int a[1], b[1], c[1];
>
> void
> test (void)
> {
> a[0] = (b[0] == c[0]) ? -1 : a[0];
> }
>
> void
> test1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115659
--- Comment #4 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
>c = x CMP y
>r = c ? -1 : z => r = c ? c : z
>r = c ? z : 0 => r = c ? z : c
>
> this is probably best left for ISEL. I agree the transforms elim
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115659
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
c = x CMP y
r = c ? -1 : z => r = c ? c : z
r = c ? z : 0 => r = c ? z : c
this is probably best left for ISEL. I agree the transforms eliminating
the COND are useful in general and suitabl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115659
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |tree-optimization
CC|
14 matches
Mail list logo
