https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85694
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85694
--- Comment #10 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Tue Jul 3 17:33:28 2018
New Revision: 262354
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262354&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/85694
* config/i386/sse.md (uavg3_ceil)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85694
--- Comment #9 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Created attachment 44348
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44348&action=edit
x86 target patch
I'm testing the attached patch for x86 targets.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85694
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|rsa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85694
--- Comment #7 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Tue Jul 3 14:27:28 2018
New Revision: 262347
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262347&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[17/n] PR85694: AArch64 support for AVG_FLOOR/CEIL
This
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85694
--- Comment #6 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Tue Jul 3 10:03:44 2018
New Revision: 262335
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262335&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[16/n] PR85694: Add detection of averaging operations
T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85694
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85694
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
OK, so adding another pattern plus IFN would be the canonical way of
vectorizing this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85694
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> Hmm, but if you have 255 + 255 + 1 then you need to use pavgw at least,
> otherwise the vectorization isn't semantically equivalent? Or do the
> instructions comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85694
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Hmm, but if you have 255 + 255 + 1 then you need to use pavgw at least,
otherwise the vectorization isn't semantically equivalent? Or do the
instructions compute
the intermediate results in greater precisio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85694
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Target|
11 matches
Mail list logo