On November 3, 2014 8:34:11 AM CET, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 08:15:32AM +0100, Marc Glisse wrote:
>> Should I commit the following version, which passed testing as well?
>
>Yes, thanks.
Thanks for fixing this!
Richard.
> Jakub
On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 08:15:32AM +0100, Marc Glisse wrote:
> Should I commit the following version, which passed testing as well?
Yes, thanks.
Jakub
On Sun, 2 Nov 2014, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Sun, Nov 02, 2014 at 11:08:57AM +0100, Marc Glisse wrote:
@@ -14189,47 +14190,47 @@ fold_ternary_loc (location_t loc, enum t
return fold_build2_loc (loc, PLUS_EXPR, type,
const_binop (MULT_EXPR, arg0, arg1), arg
On Sun, Nov 02, 2014 at 11:08:57AM +0100, Marc Glisse wrote:
> @@ -14189,47 +14190,47 @@ fold_ternary_loc (location_t loc, enum t
> return fold_build2_loc (loc, PLUS_EXPR, type,
> const_binop (MULT_EXPR, arg0, arg1), arg2);
>if (integer_zerop (arg2))
>
On Sun, 2 Nov 2014, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 09:56:32AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
The following patch makes fold_ternary no longer make
VEC_PERMs valid for the target invalid. As poin
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 09:56:32AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
The following patch makes fold_ternary no longer make
VEC_PERMs valid for the target invalid. As pointed out
in the PR we only need to make su
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 09:56:32AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > The following patch makes fold_ternary no longer make
> > VEC_PERMs valid for the target invalid. As pointed out
> > in the PR we only need to make sure this doesn't happen
> > aft
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 09:56:32AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> The following patch makes fold_ternary no longer make
> VEC_PERMs valid for the target invalid. As pointed out
> in the PR we only need to make sure this doesn't happen
> after vector lowering.
Well, even if you do that before v
