On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 8:09 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 11:10:58PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
>> I wonder if transforming the const-int to wide int makes this all easier to
>> read?
>
> Here is updated patch that does that.
> Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linu
Hi!
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 11:10:58PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> I wonder if transforming the const-int to wide int makes this all easier to
> read?
Here is updated patch that does that.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk?
2016-11-21 Jakub Jelinek
On November 18, 2016 10:45:10 PM GMT+01:00, Jakub Jelinek
wrote:
>Hi!
>
>As the testcase shows, expand_divmod doesn't handle properly
>division/remainder in modes larger than HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT like
>TImode - if op1 is "negative" CONST_INT, it means it has 65 most
>significant
>bits set, but
Hi!
As the testcase shows, expand_divmod doesn't handle properly
division/remainder in modes larger than HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT like
TImode - if op1 is "negative" CONST_INT, it means it has 65 most significant
bits set, but EXACT_POWER_OF_2_OR_ZERO_P will happily return true on that
and optimize t
