On Thursday, January 21, 2016 09:21:52 AM Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Jan 2016, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
> > On Friday, January 08, 2016 10:05:25 AM Richard Biener wrote:
> > > On Tue, 5 Jan 2016, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > bswap optimization pass generate wrong
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
> On Friday, January 08, 2016 10:05:25 AM Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Tue, 5 Jan 2016, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > bswap optimization pass generate wrong code on big endian targets when the
> > > result of a bit operation it anal
On Friday, January 08, 2016 10:05:25 AM Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Jan 2016, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > bswap optimization pass generate wrong code on big endian targets when the
> > result of a bit operation it analyzed is a partial load of the range of
> > memory accessed b
On Tue, 5 Jan 2016, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
> Hi,
>
> bswap optimization pass generate wrong code on big endian targets when the
> result of a bit operation it analyzed is a partial load of the range of
> memory
> accessed by the original expression (when one or more bytes at lowest address
On Tuesday, January 05, 2016 01:53:37 PM you wrote:
>
> Regression testsuite was run on a bootstrapped native x86_64-linux-gnu GCC
> and on an arm-none-eabi GCC cross-compiler without any regression. I'm
> waiting for a slot on gcc110 to do a big endian bootstrap but at least the
> testcase works
Hi,
bswap optimization pass generate wrong code on big endian targets when the
result of a bit operation it analyzed is a partial load of the range of memory
accessed by the original expression (when one or more bytes at lowest address
were lost in the computation). This is due to the way cmpxc
