http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52480
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #28391|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54762
--- Comment #2 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-08 18:07:30
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> When you do this, I'd recommend generating "real" labels in gcc based on %=
> (say, ".L.fb%=" instead of local labels, which should be left to the gcc use
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54685
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |middle-end
--- Comment #3 from Oleg
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54699
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54760
--- Comment #3 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-09 18:59:19
UTC ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Tue Oct 9 18:59:11 2012
New Revision: 192269
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192269
Log:
PR target/54760
* doc/extend.tex
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54760
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54680
--- Comment #1 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-09 19:57:35
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
>
> Another scenario that does not work however is:
>
> float test03 (int x)
> {
> return sinf ( x * 2 * pi / 65536 );
> }
>
> (Notice the missi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54602
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54602
--- Comment #2 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-09 22:57:40
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> The problem is the "*movsi_pop" insn. It prevents delay-slot stuffing of pop
> insns on everything < SH3. This was probably added to avoid pop insns in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54699
--- Comment #6 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-10 00:22:54
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
>
> It looks we've got reg+reg+const addressing. It seems that
> reload_completed simply means that hard register are allocated
> already but doesn't me
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54602
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52480
--- Comment #4 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-10 00:51:03
UTC ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Wed Oct 10 00:50:37 2012
New Revision: 192283
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192283
Log:
PR target/52480
* config/sh/sh.m
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52480
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54682
--- Comment #1 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-10 22:17:13
UTC ---
Another thing that could be considered are T bit stores via the 'movt' insn.
For example:
movt r2 ! EX
< something else; r2, T not modified>
movt r4 ! EX
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54602
--- Comment #5 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-10 23:24:07
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
>
> I don't know the history about it. I can only imagine that some
> system could assume some banked regs will be not clobbered with
> their exception
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54602
--- Comment #6 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-11 13:48:04
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> >
> > I don't know the history about it. I can only imagine that some
> > system could assume some banked regs will be not
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54760
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53949
--- Comment #7 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-11 20:43:02
UTC ---
A note regarding the SR.S bit. The insns sets and clrs are available only on
SH3* and SH4*. SH1* and SH2* (incl SH2A) do not implement them.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54760
--- Comment #7 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-12 00:26:42
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > Kaz, do you happen to know something regarding this matter?
>
> My SH4 software manual says for STC that all stc/stc.l ins
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51244
--- Comment #55 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-12
00:41:31 UTC ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Fri Oct 12 00:41:23 2012
New Revision: 192387
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192387
Log:
PR target/51244
* config/sh/sh.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54760
--- Comment #9 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-12 00:45:45
UTC ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Fri Oct 12 00:45:36 2012
New Revision: 192388
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192388
Log:
PR target/54760
* config/sh/sh.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54760
--- Comment #10 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-12
00:50:44 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> (In reply to comment #7)
> > * Slot illegal instruction exception <<< but which insns?!?!
>
> Ah, you could see a list in that manual rej09b0003_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54680
--- Comment #2 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-12 23:19:32
UTC ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Fri Oct 12 23:19:27 2012
New Revision: 192416
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192416
Log:
PR target/54680
* config/sh/sh.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54602
--- Comment #7 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-12 23:22:52
UTC ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Fri Oct 12 23:22:48 2012
New Revision: 192417
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192417
Log:
PR target/54602
* config/sh/sh.m
|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed||2012-10-14
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Oleg
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34777
--- Comment #7 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-15 21:59:27
UTC ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Mon Oct 15 21:59:21 2012
New Revision: 192478
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192478
Log:
PR target/34777
* gcc.target/sh/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54760
--- Comment #11 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-15
22:04:42 UTC ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Mon Oct 15 22:04:37 2012
New Revision: 192480
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192480
Log:
PR target/54760
* config/sh/sh.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51244
--- Comment #56 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-15
22:08:14 UTC ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Mon Oct 15 22:08:07 2012
New Revision: 192481
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192481
Log:
PR target/51244
* config/sh/sh-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34777
--- Comment #8 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-15 22:09:34
UTC ---
Since this doesn't seem to be an issue on current trunk (4.8), can we close
this PR?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54925
--- Comment #2 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-15 22:15:24
UTC ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Mon Oct 15 22:15:18 2012
New Revision: 192482
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192482
Log:
PR target/54925
* gcc.c-torture/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34777
--- Comment #10 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-16
00:17:41 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> (In reply to comment #8)
> > Since this doesn't seem to be an issue on current trunk (4.8), can we close
> > this PR?
>
> The test case in PR 34807 w
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34777
--- Comment #11 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-16
00:58:27 UTC ---
The following...
Index: gcc/config/sh/sh.c
===
--- gcc/config/sh/sh.c(revision 192482)
+++ gcc/config/sh/sh.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54925
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54938
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54089
--- Comment #23 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-16
11:49:14 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #22)
> (In reply to comment #0)
> > The code related to shift patterns in sh.c / sh.md maybe could use some
> > improvements here and there. In some places c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54938
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54938
--- Comment #5 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-16 21:22:02
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> >
> > In emit_cmp_and_jump_insn_1, the line
> >
> > gcc_assert (!find_reg_note (insn, REG_BR_PROB, 0));
> >
> > blows up, because of config/s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54830
--- Comment #1 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-18 19:24:36
UTC ---
Created attachment 28487
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28487
Reduced test case
This is the reduced test case. It shows that there are actually two redundan
||2012-10-18
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
||2012-10-20
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-20 09:29:10
UTC ---
Thanks for tracking
||2012-10-27
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-27 13:15:12
UTC ---
Created attachment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55042
--- Comment #1 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-27 13:36:24
UTC ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Sat Oct 27 13:36:20 2012
New Revision: 192877
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192877
Log:
PR target/55042
* config/sh/sh.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54760
--- Comment #13 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-27
13:41:25 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> (In reply to comment #9)
>
> > Log:
> > PR target/54760
> > * config/sh/sh.c (bdesc): Remove thread pointer built-ins.
>
> You left sh1_b
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55042
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55042
--- Comment #4 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-27 14:39:46
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> static bool ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED
>
> perhaps?
Yeah, that would also do the job. Do you insist? :)
Personally, I don't care, except for the comment that
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49263
--- Comment #19 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-28
22:01:47 UTC ---
Another thing I've noticed...
Cases such as:
mov.l r0,@r2! LS
mov r13,r0! MT
and #7,r0 ! EX
tst r0,r0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54963
--- Comment #3 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-28 23:01:24
UTC ---
Created attachment 28551
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28551
Proposed patch
This patch fixes the problem, by using 'emit_move_insn' instead of manually
doi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54963
--- Comment #5 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-29 11:13:19
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > Created attachment 28551 [details]
> > Proposed patch
> >
> > This patch fixes the problem, by using 'emit_move_insn' ins
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54386
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|sh*-*-* |sh*-*-* arm*
Status|UNCO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54386
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Unaligned mem load wrongly |[4.8 Regression] Unaligned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54963
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #28551|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54602
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54680
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54386
--- Comment #6 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-30 09:04:37
UTC ---
Just for the record, this seems to happen only for mem loads. Mem stores
expand as expected.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54988
--- Comment #8 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-30 09:07:17
UTC ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Tue Oct 30 09:07:08 2012
New Revision: 192982
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192982
Log:
PR target/54988
* config/sh/sh.m
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54963
--- Comment #8 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-30 09:22:31
UTC ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Tue Oct 30 09:22:14 2012
New Revision: 192983
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192983
Log:
PR target/54963
* config/sh/iter
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49263
--- Comment #20 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-31
13:47:07 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #19)
> Another thing I've noticed...
> Cases such as:
>
> mov.l r0,@r2! LS
> mov r13,r0! MT
> and #7,r0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53988
--- Comment #2 from Oleg Endo 2012-10-31 22:08:42
UTC ---
There was a typo in the PR number when committing the patch for this issue.
This is the original commit message that accidentally ended up in PR 54988:
Author: olegendo
Date: Tue
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54988
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54963
--- Comment #9 from Oleg Endo 2012-11-01 00:01:13
UTC ---
Kaz, can we close this PR?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54546
--- Comment #3 from Oleg Endo 2012-11-01 00:03:11
UTC ---
Even though simple_return is not supported on SHmedia, is it OK to close this
PR?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55160
Bug #: 55160
Summary: [4.8 Regression] Counterproductive loop induction
variable optimization
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONF
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55162
Bug #: 55162
Summary: Loop ivopts cuts off top bits of loop counter
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55162
--- Comment #1 from Oleg Endo 2012-11-01 10:11:46
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> The same could be done on SH, too (comparing against the end address instead
> of
> using a loop counter), but it would add a loop setup overhead. In th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54938
--- Comment #7 from Oleg Endo 2012-11-01 21:19:53
UTC ---
I guess this is done, isn't it Easwaran?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29963
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55160
--- Comment #3 from Oleg Endo 2012-11-01 21:28:53
UTC ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Thu Nov 1 21:28:49 2012
New Revision: 193071
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193071
Log:
PR target/55160
* gcc.target/sh/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55162
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51244
--- Comment #57 from Oleg Endo 2012-11-03
12:01:05 UTC ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Sat Nov 3 12:01:01 2012
New Revision: 193119
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193119
Log:
PR target/51244
* config/sh/sh.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55190
Bug #: 55190
Summary: [SH] ivopts causes loop setup bloat
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55162
--- Comment #4 from Oleg Endo 2012-11-03 12:19:28
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
I've created a new PR 55190 for this.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54938
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
Bug #: 55212
Summary: [SH] Switch from IRA to LRA
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53988
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54089
--- Comment #24 from Oleg Endo 2012-11-06
11:55:47 UTC ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Tue Nov 6 11:55:43 2012
New Revision: 193236
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193236
Log:
PR target/54089
* config/sh/sh.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54685
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|SUSPENDED
--- Comment #4 from Oleg
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54830
--- Comment #2 from Oleg Endo 2012-11-07 21:27:11
UTC ---
Just for the record..
The arithmetic right shift by 16 splits into the sequence swap.w exts.w after
combine. Thus, any other following extensions don't get combined away.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53949
--- Comment #8 from Oleg Endo 2012-11-07 21:31:39
UTC ---
Christian, I just wanted to check with you whether you've already started doing
something regarding the mac.w / mac.l instructions?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29845
--- Comment #9 from Oleg Endo 2012-11-07 21:37:47
UTC ---
Jörn,
I was curious whether the soft fpu code of yours is also available as C/C++, or
did you write it in asm only? I guess it would be an interesting bunch of code
quality tests for the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54089
--- Comment #25 from Oleg Endo 2012-11-07
23:31:20 UTC ---
Created attachment 28633
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28633
Arithmetic right shift rework 2
This could be an alternative approach for the arith right shif
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29845
--- Comment #11 from Oleg Endo 2012-11-07
23:33:55 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> but the compiler is not much good at combining
> high-level transformations with streamlined data representation,
> ABI modification, register allocati
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48806
--- Comment #7 from Oleg Endo 2012-11-07 23:50:09
UTC ---
I've tried to reproduce the test case of this PR on rev 193240 (4.8) with the
change in rev 185714 reverted. It seems that this test case doesn't trigger
the error any more. Howev
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29845
--- Comment #13 from Oleg Endo 2012-11-08
01:08:51 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> (In reply to comment #11)
>
> > Do you have any particular example in mind?
>
> Just compare the size & performance of the code generated from fp-b
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54089
--- Comment #26 from Oleg Endo 2012-11-09
10:48:17 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #25)
> Maybe the better solution would indeed be to add a
> arith -> logical shift conversion pass before combine, or try to convert arith
> shifts in the spl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22553
--- Comment #26 from Oleg Endo 2012-11-09
21:44:16 UTC ---
I've tried enabling sched1 on rev 193341 and ran the test suite with
make -k -j4 check
RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=sh-sim\{-m2/-ml,-m2/-mb,-m2a/-mb,-m4/-ml,-m4/-mb,-m4a/-ml,-m4a/-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22553
--- Comment #27 from Oleg Endo 2012-11-09
22:41:15 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #26)
Another way that fixes the problem mentioned above is to not allow non-float
mode operands in the first place. The patch below also fixes the failure,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56547
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org
Target: sh*-*-*
The following test case
extern void foo (void);
#pragma interrupt
#pragma nosave_low_regs
void
isr (void)
{
foo ();
}
with
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56547
--- Comment #2 from Oleg Endo ---
Fixed for SH on 4.9:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revision&revision=199110
gcc/ChangeLog:
PR target/56547
* config/sh/sh.md (fmasf4): Remove empty constraints strings.
(*fmasf4, *fmasf4_media
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30807
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11
||olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #13 from Oleg Endo ---
Fixed in 4.9. by picking up the suggestions from comment #3.
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revision&revision=199873
PR target/6526
* confi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56547
--- Comment #3 from Oleg Endo ---
Fixed for SH on 4.8:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revision&revision=199874
PR target/56547
* config/sh/sh.md (fmasf4): Remove empty constraints strings.
(*fmasf4, *fmasf4_media): New insns.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55190
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |rtl-optimization
--- Comment #2 from Oleg End
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50749
--- Comment #14 from Oleg Endo ---
Just wanted to clarify the reason why the examples in the description have
'-fno-ivopts', as it caused some confusion on the mailing list:
int test_0 (char* p, int c)
{
int r = 0;
r += *p++;
r += *p++;
r
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52483
--- Comment #4 from Oleg Endo ---
Loads from volatile mems have been fixed on 4.9 trunk.
While working on it I noticed that stores to volatile mems have basically the
same issue. I'll try to come up with a fix for that, too.
http://gcc.gnu.org/v
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39423
--- Comment #36 from Oleg Endo ---
This is annoying:
int
foo (int tab[], int index)
{
return tab[index+1] + tab[index+2];
}
-O2 -m4 -mb:
add #1,r5
mov r4,r1
shll2 r5
add r5,r1
mov r5,r
|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed||2013-07-14
CC||olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #3 from Oleg Endo ---
I ran into this issue when trying out
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51244
--- Comment #60 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Laurent Aflonsi from comment #59)
> I have a functional regression due to this improvement when we are compiling
> the enclosed example in -O2.
> $ sh-superh-elf-gcc -O2 pr51244-20-main.c pr51244-20
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12081
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #25
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51244
--- Comment #62 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Laurent Aflonsi from comment #61)
>
> More generally, I'm surprised to see that optimization at mapping level,
> isn't this a generic problematic that should be handled at rtl dead code
> eliminatio
201 - 300 of 1963 matches
Mail list logo
