Re: [PATCH, match] Fix pr68714

2016-03-19 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 08:09:54AM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote: > Ah, sure. I should have simply tested the reassoc1 dump file, before > generic vector lowering. The testcase fails on i386 (and I assume fails on powerpc too), due to the psABI warnings/notes. I've committed this as obvious. 2

Re: [PATCH, match] Fix pr68714

2016-03-15 Thread Richard Henderson
On 03/15/2016 02:26 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote: Richard Henderson writes: diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr68714.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr68714.c new file mode 100644 index 000..741d311 --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr68714.c @@ -0,0 +1,9 @@ +/* {

Re: [PATCH, match] Fix pr68714

2016-03-15 Thread Richard Biener
On Tue, 15 Mar 2016, Andreas Schwab wrote: > Richard Henderson writes: > > > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr68714.c > > b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr68714.c > > new file mode 100644 > > index 000..741d311 > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr68714.c

Re: [PATCH, match] Fix pr68714

2016-03-15 Thread Andreas Schwab
Richard Henderson writes: > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr68714.c > b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr68714.c > new file mode 100644 > index 000..741d311 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr68714.c > @@ -0,0 +1,9 @@ > +/* { dg-do compile } */ > +/* { dg-opt

Re: [PATCH, match] Fix pr68714

2016-03-14 Thread Richard Biener
On Fri, 11 Mar 2016, Richard Henderson wrote: > On 03/02/2016 01:31 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > As a general remark I think handling of this simplification is > > better done in the reassoc pass (see Jakubs comment #4) given > > || and && associate. So I'd rather go down that route if possible.

Re: [PATCH, match] Fix pr68714

2016-03-11 Thread Richard Henderson
On 03/02/2016 01:31 AM, Richard Biener wrote: As a general remark I think handling of this simplification is better done in the reassoc pass (see Jakubs comment #4) given || and && associate. So I'd rather go down that route if possible. This seems to do the trick. r~ diff --git a/gcc/tests

Re: [PATCH, match] Fix pr68714

2016-03-02 Thread Richard Biener
On Wed, 2 Mar 2016, Marc Glisse wrote: > On Wed, 2 Mar 2016, Richard Biener wrote: > > > On Tue, 1 Mar 2016, Richard Henderson wrote: > > > > > This is similar to Mark Gilsse's patch in the OP, except that it ensures > > > that > > > the expression will fold back to a single condition. I did in

Re: [PATCH, match] Fix pr68714

2016-03-02 Thread Marc Glisse
On Wed, 2 Mar 2016, Richard Biener wrote: On Tue, 1 Mar 2016, Richard Henderson wrote: This is similar to Mark Gilsse's patch in the OP, except that it ensures that the expression will fold back to a single condition. I did include Richi's patch from #c6 to make it more likely to trigger asap

Re: [PATCH, match] Fix pr68714

2016-03-02 Thread Richard Biener
On Tue, 1 Mar 2016, Richard Henderson wrote: > This is similar to Mark Gilsse's patch in the OP, except that it ensures that > the expression will fold back to a single condition. I did include Richi's > patch from #c6 to make it more likely to trigger asap. > > I'd appreciate feedback on the ma

[PATCH, match] Fix pr68714

2016-03-01 Thread Richard Henderson
This is similar to Mark Gilsse's patch in the OP, except that it ensures that the expression will fold back to a single condition. I did include Richi's patch from #c6 to make it more likely to trigger asap. I'd appreciate feedback on the match.pd changes; it's my first time looking into this new