On 10/14/21 6:07 PM, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches wrote:
On 10/9/21 12:47 PM, Aldy Hernandez via Gcc-patches wrote:
We seem to be passing a lot of context around in the strlen code. I
certainly don't want to contribute to more.
Most of the handle_* functions are passing the gsi as well as eith
I've been experimenting with a change to make all inline functions
implicitly constexpr; this revealed that we are instantiating too
aggressively for speculative constant evaluation, leading to ordering
difficulties with e.g. is_a_helper::test. This patch tries to
avoid such instantiation until we
Hi,
-march=cascadelake which contains -mavx512vl produces unmatched scan
for vf[c]maddcsh test, so add -mno-avx512vl to vf[c]maddcsh-1a.c.
Also add scan for vblendmps to vf[c]maddcph tests to check correctness.
Tested on unix{-m32,} with -march=cascadelake.
Pushed to trunk as obvious fix.
gcc/
Hi, Honza & Martin,
Would you please take some time to review proposal and patches of whole
program devirtualization? We have to say, this feature is not 100% safe, but
provides us a way to deploy correct WPD on C++ program if we elaborately
prepare linked libraries to ensure rtti symbols are co
Thanks,
Feng
From: Feng Xue OS
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2021 5:26 PM
To: Jan Hubicka; mjam...@suse.cz; Richard Biener; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: JiangNing OS
Subject: [PATCH/RFC 2/2] WPD: Enable whole program devirtualization at LTRANS
This patch is
On 2021-10-12, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 09:21:21AM -0700, Fāng-ruì Sòng wrote:
> > An output constraint takes a lvalue. While GCC happily strips the
> > incorrect lvalue to rvalue conversion, Clang rejects the code by default:
> >
> > error: invalid use of a cast in a inl
Hi,
For V4HFmode, doing vector concat like
__builtin_shufflevector (a, b, {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7})
could trigger ICE since it is not handled in ix86_vector_init ().
Handle HFmode like HImode to avoid such ICE.
Bootstrappted/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu{-m32,} and sde{-m32,}
OK for master
On 14/10/21 7:43 pm, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On Thu, 14 Oct 2021 at 18:11, François Dumont wrote:
Hi
On a related subject I am waiting for some feedback on:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/libstdc++/2021-August/053005.html
I'm concerned that this adds too much overhead for the
_GLIBCXX_AS
On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 1:07 PM Hongyu Wang via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> For V4HFmode, doing vector concat like
>
> __builtin_shufflevector (a, b, {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7})
>
> could trigger ICE since it is not handled in ix86_vector_init ().
>
> Handle HFmode like HImode to avoid such ICE.
> This part seems not related to vector shuffle.
Yes, have separated this part to another patch and checked-in.
Updated patch. Ok for this one?
Hongtao Liu via Gcc-patches 于2021年10月14日周四 下午2:33写道:
>
> On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 10:39 AM Hongyu Wang via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > This
On 2021/9/23 20:17, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Sep 2021, Xionghu Luo wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 2021/8/11 17:16, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> On Wed, 11 Aug 2021, Xionghu Luo wrote:
>>>
On 2021/8/10 22:47, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Aug 2021, Xionghu Luo wrote:
>
>>>
On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 1:37 PM Hongyu Wang wrote:
>
> > This part seems not related to vector shuffle.
> Yes, have separated this part to another patch and checked-in.
>
> Updated patch. Ok for this one?
>
> Hongtao Liu via Gcc-patches 于2021年10月14日周四 下午2:33写道:
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 10:
> ix86_expand_vec_perm is only called by (define_expand "vec_perm"
> which means target, op0 and op1 must existed, and you can drop
> if(target/op0/op1) stuff.
Yes, dropped.
> Those checks for NULL seems reasonable according to documents,
> op0,op1,target maybe NULL.
Thanks for pointing it out, d
Ping^2, thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-September/579637.html
On 2021/10/8 09:17, Xionghu Luo via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Ping, thanks.
>
>
> On 2021/9/17 13:25, Xionghu Luo wrote:
>> These two patches are updated version from:
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2
On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 2:15 PM Hongyu Wang wrote:
>
> > ix86_expand_vec_perm is only called by (define_expand "vec_perm"
> > which means target, op0 and op1 must existed, and you can drop
> > if(target/op0/op1) stuff.
>
> Yes, dropped.
>
> > Those checks for NULL seems reasonable according to doc
101 - 115 of 115 matches
Mail list logo