On 8/29/2022 8:30 AM, Aldy Hernandez via Gcc-patches wrote:
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 4:27 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 04:20:16PM +0200, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
Sure, I can add the HONOR_NANS, but can we even "see" a NAN in the IL
for -ffinite-math-only?
Sure, you can, e.g.
On 8/29/2022 8:42 AM, Toon Moene wrote:
On 8/29/22 16:36, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 4:30 PM Toon Moene wrote:
On 8/29/22 16:15, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
But even with -ffinite-math-only, is there any benefit to propagating
a known NAN? For example:
The original inten
On 8/29/2022 8:15 AM, Aldy Hernandez via Gcc-patches wrote:
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 4:08 PM Toon Moene wrote:
On 8/29/22 15:54, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 03:45:33PM +0200, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
For convenience, singleton_p() returns false for a NAN. IMO
On 8/29/2022 7:54 AM, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 03:45:33PM +0200, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
For convenience, singleton_p() returns false for a NAN. IMO, it makes
the implementation cleaner, but I'm not wed to the idea if someone
objects.
If singleton_p() is us
On Mon, 29 Aug 2022, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 03:45:33PM +0200, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> > For convenience, singleton_p() returns false for a NAN. IMO, it makes
> > the implementation cleaner, but I'm not wed to the idea if someone
> > objects.
>
> If singlet
OK, I'm good to go.
As the patch was getting rather large, I have split it into two parts.
The first is the core endpoints support to frange along with removal
of the +-INF markers (since they are no longer needed). The second
part is the FP relational operators. Splitting it up should help in
r
On 8/29/22 16:36, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 4:30 PM Toon Moene wrote:
On 8/29/22 16:15, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
But even with -ffinite-math-only, is there any benefit to propagating
a known NAN? For example:
The original intent (in 2002) for the option -ffinite-math-onl
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 4:30 PM Toon Moene wrote:
>
> On 8/29/22 16:15, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
>
> > But even with -ffinite-math-only, is there any benefit to propagating
> > a known NAN? For example:
>
> The original intent (in 2002) for the option -ffinite-math-only was for
> the optimizers to i
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 4:27 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 04:20:16PM +0200, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> > Sure, I can add the HONOR_NANS, but can we even "see" a NAN in the IL
> > for -ffinite-math-only?
>
> Sure, you can, e.g. __builtin_nan{,s}{,f,l} etc. would do it.
> It woul
On 8/29/22 16:15, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
But even with -ffinite-math-only, is there any benefit to propagating
a known NAN? For example:
The original intent (in 2002) for the option -ffinite-math-only was for
the optimizers to ignore all the various exceptions to common
optimizations because
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 04:20:16PM +0200, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> Sure, I can add the HONOR_NANS, but can we even "see" a NAN in the IL
> for -ffinite-math-only?
Sure, you can, e.g. __builtin_nan{,s}{,f,l} etc. would do it.
It would be UB to use it at runtime in -ffinite-math-only code though.
Ano
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 4:17 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 04:08:58PM +0200, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 3:55 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 03:45:33PM +0200, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> > > > For convenience, singleton_p() retu
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 04:08:58PM +0200, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 3:55 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 03:45:33PM +0200, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> > > For convenience, singleton_p() returns false for a NAN. IMO, it makes
> > > the implementation clean
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 4:08 PM Toon Moene wrote:
>
> On 8/29/22 15:54, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 03:45:33PM +0200, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
>
> >> For convenience, singleton_p() returns false for a NAN. IMO, it makes
> >> the implementation cleaner, but I'm
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 3:55 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 03:45:33PM +0200, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> > For convenience, singleton_p() returns false for a NAN. IMO, it makes
> > the implementation cleaner, but I'm not wed to the idea if someone
> > objects.
>
> If singleton_p
On 8/29/22 15:54, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 03:45:33PM +0200, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
For convenience, singleton_p() returns false for a NAN. IMO, it makes
the implementation cleaner, but I'm not wed to the idea if someone
objects.
If singleton_p() is used
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 03:45:33PM +0200, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> For convenience, singleton_p() returns false for a NAN. IMO, it makes
> the implementation cleaner, but I'm not wed to the idea if someone
> objects.
If singleton_p() is used to decide whether one can just replace a variable
with s
Jakub, et al... here is the latest version of the frange endpoints
patch addressing the signed zero problem (well treating +-0.0
ambiguously), as well as implementing all the relational operators.
[Andrew M: I mostly copied our relop code from irange, while keeping
track NANs, etc. It should be p
On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 12:16 PM Aldy Hernandez wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 7:40 PM Andrew Pinski wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 8:55 AM Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> > >
> > > [pinskia: I'm CCing you as the author of the match.pd pattern.]
> > >
> > > So, as I wrap up the work here (la
On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 7:40 PM Andrew Pinski wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 8:55 AM Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> >
> > [pinskia: I'm CCing you as the author of the match.pd pattern.]
> >
> > So, as I wrap up the work here (latest patch attached), I see there's
> > another phiopt regression (not s
On Fri, Aug 26, 2022, 19:40 Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 8:55 AM Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> >
> > [pinskia: I'm CCing you as the author of the match.pd pattern.]
> >
> > So, as I wrap up the work here (latest patch attached), I see there's
> > another phiopt regression (not spaces
On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 8:55 AM Aldy Hernandez wrote:
>
> [pinskia: I'm CCing you as the author of the match.pd pattern.]
>
> So, as I wrap up the work here (latest patch attached), I see there's
> another phiopt regression (not spaceship related). I was hoping
> someone could either give me a ha
[pinskia: I'm CCing you as the author of the match.pd pattern.]
So, as I wrap up the work here (latest patch attached), I see there's
another phiopt regression (not spaceship related). I was hoping
someone could either give me a hand, or offer some guidance.
The failure is in gcc.dg/tree-ssa/phi
23 matches
Mail list logo
