On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 08:31:43AM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> Interestingly, when the quadword compares are expanded at GIMPLE time,
> we generate worse code involving individual 64-bit compares. For the
> time being, I will not expand these at GIMPLE time; independently, this
> bears looking
Hi Will,
On 7/29/21 7:42 AM, Bill Schmidt wrote:
On 7/28/21 4:21 PM, will schmidt wrote:
On Thu, 2021-06-17 at 10:19 -0500, Bill Schmidt via Gcc-patches wrote:
+/* Vector compares; EQ, NE, GE, GT, LE. */
+case RS6000_BIF_VCMPEQUB:
+case RS6000_BIF_VCMPEQUH:
+case RS6000_BIF_V
On 7/28/21 4:21 PM, will schmidt wrote:
On Thu, 2021-06-17 at 10:19 -0500, Bill Schmidt via Gcc-patches wrote:
+/* Vector compares; EQ, NE, GE, GT, LE. */
+case RS6000_BIF_VCMPEQUB:
+case RS6000_BIF_VCMPEQUH:
+case RS6000_BIF_VCMPEQUW:
+case RS6000_BIF_VCMPEQUD:
+ fo
On Thu, 2021-06-17 at 10:19 -0500, Bill Schmidt via Gcc-patches wrote:
Hi,
> This is another patch that looks bigger than it really is. Because we
> have a new namespace for the builtins, allowing us to have both the old
> and new builtin infrastructure supported at once, we need versions of
>
This is another patch that looks bigger than it really is. Because we
have a new namespace for the builtins, allowing us to have both the old
and new builtin infrastructure supported at once, we need versions of
these functions that use the new builtin namespace. Otherwise the code is
unchanged.
This is another patch that looks bigger than it really is. Because we
have a new namespace for the builtins, allowing us to have both the old
and new builtin infrastructure supported at once, we need versions of
these functions that use the new builtin namespace. Otherwise the code is
unchanged.
