On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 9:37 AM Hongtao Liu <crazy...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 13, 2021 at 2:21 AM H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches > <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 8:13 AM Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 07:55:26AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > > I have following patch queued for testing for this... > > > > > > > > > > 2021-11-12 Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> > > > > > > > > > > PR target/103205 > > > > > * config/i386/sync.md (atomic_bit_test_and_set<mode>, > > > > > atomic_bit_test_and_complement<mode>, > > > > > atomic_bit_test_and_reset<mode>): Use OPTAB_WIDEN instead of > > > > > OPTAB_DIRECT. > > > > > > > > > > * gcc.target/i386/pr103205.c: New test. > > > > > > > > Can you include my tests? Or you can leave out your test and I can > > > > check > > > > in my tests after your fix has been checked in. > > > > > > I'd prefer the latter. > > > > > > > Here is the v2 patch on top of yours. > > > > -- > > H.J. > > It looks like there're many return; in if (!bit) branch, the those > return should never be executed since they're already guarded by > gimple_nop_atomic_bit_test_and_p, So we'd better also remove those > return; It looks like those return are used for (rhs_code == BIT_AND_EXPR) which doesn't change gimple before, so nevermind. > > -- > BR, > Hongtao
-- BR, Hongtao
