On Tue, 2024-03-05 at 13:06 +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 2024-03-04 at 08:48 -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
> > > I have now regenerated the patch to also include the new avr
> > > mfuse-
> > > add change. It would be nice to get this committed so we can turn
> > > on the
> > >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114239
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
The testcase is the same as in PR113555 - so should've added to test suite I
suppose. Indeed ICEs on trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114239
Bug ID: 114239
Summary: ice: error: definition in block does not dominate use
in block
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114234
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114234
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101461
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
--- Comment #24 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #22)
> I think optimize_function_for_size_p (cfun) isn't always true if
> optimize_size is since it looks at the function-specific setting
> of that flag, so
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
--- Comment #23 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #21)
> Looking at the prototype patch, why need to change also the splitters?
Purely for implementation reasons, we check for general resp. SSE register in
the operand
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
--- Comment #22 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 5 Mar 2024, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
>
> --- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> Either change those too, or the splitter
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114238
Bug ID: 114238
Summary: Multiple 554.roms_r run-time regressions (4%-20%)
since r14-9193-ga0b1798042d033
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114009
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
Loops on named vector register are not vectorized (see comment 11 of
PR113622), so the these test cases have been failing for a while.
Rewrite them using check-function-bodies to remove hard coding register
names. A barrier is needed to always load the first operand before the
second operand.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
--- Comment #21 from Jan Hubicka ---
Looking at the prototype patch, why need to change also the splitters?
My original goal was to use splitters to expand to faster code sequences
while having patterns necessary for both variants. This makes
Looking at the prototype patch, why need to change also the splitters?
My original goal was to use splitters to expand to faster code sequences
while having patterns necessary for both variants. This makes it
possible to use optimize_insn_for_size/speed and make decisions using BB
profile, since
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
--- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #19)
> (In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #18)
> > But the problem here is more that optab initializations happens only at
> > the optimization_node changes and not
On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 12:38 AM Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 4, 2024 at 9:40 PM Ken Matsui wrote:
> >
> > (x - y) CMP 0 is equivalent to x CMP y where x and y are signed
> > integers and CMP is <, <=, >, or >=. Similarly, 0 CMP (x - y) is
> > equivalent to y CMP x. As reported in PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
--- Comment #19 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #18)
> But the problem here is more that optab initializations happens only at
> the optimization_node changes and not if we switch from hot function to
> cold?
I think
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114237
Bug ID: 114237
Summary: GCC emits no narrowing conversion warning when call is
made indirectly through std::invoke
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104850
--- Comment #7 from Benjamin Buch ---
Sorry wrong number; Bug 114076
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
--- Comment #18 from Jan Hubicka ---
optimize_function_for_size_p is not really affected by LTO or non-LTO.
It does take into account node->count and node->frequency, which is
updated during IPA, so it may change between early opts and late
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104850
Benjamin Buch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||benni.buch at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114076
--- Comment #3 from Benjamin Buch ---
I [created an overview](https://stackoverflow.com/a/78101462/4821621) with all
cases that currently work on StackOverflow. I think that all these cases should
be valid. For a properly formated version with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Either change those too, or the splitter needs some variant what to do if there
is a mismatch.
Though, optimize_size implies optimize_function_for_size_p (cfun), so if a
named pattern uses && optimize_size
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114206
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,
在 2024/3/5 下午7:50, Xi Ruoyao 写道:
The psABI allows using s9 as an alias of r22.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* config/loongarch/loongarch.h (ADDITIONAL_REGISTER_NAMES): Add
s9 as an alias of r22.
---
v1 -> v2: Add a test case.
Ok for trunk?
Ok. Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
--- Comment #16 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #15)
> Seems various backends use e.g. optimize_size or !optimize_size or optimize
> > 0 etc. in
> insn-flags.h, so perhaps change optimize_function_for_size_p (cfun)
Hi,
On Mon, 2024-03-04 at 08:48 -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
> > I have now regenerated the patch to also include the new avr mfuse-
> > add change. It would be nice to get this committed so we can turn on the
> > automatic checker.
>
> Please go ahead with that.
I committed that patch, but was
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Yeah, indeed, the optabs enable flags are cached in the optimization node, so
it is ok
to check the optimization flags in there, or target flags as well, but
optimize_function_for_*_p is not, because it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114236
Bug ID: 114236
Summary: introduce unnecessary store operation when unrolling a
loop
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
The psABI allows using s9 as an alias of r22.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* config/loongarch/loongarch.h (ADDITIONAL_REGISTER_NAMES): Add
s9 as an alias of r22.
---
v1 -> v2: Add a test case.
Ok for trunk?
gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch.h | 1 +
Recently I've fixed two wrong FP vector negate implementation which
caused wrong sign bits in zeros in targets (r14-8786 and r14-8801). To
prevent a similar issue from happening again, add a test case.
Tested on x86_64 (with SSE2, AVX, AVX2, and AVX512F), AArch64, MIPS
(with MSA), LoongArch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114211
--- Comment #9 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Noticed this in passing:
--> movq%rcx, %rdx
addqv(%rip), %rax
adcqv+8(%rip), %rdx
vmovq %rax, %xmm1
vpinsrq $1, %rdx, %xmm1, %xmm0
We could use %rcx instead
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112307
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||redi at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112303
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Still reproduceable with
--- gcc/tree-scalar-evolution.cc
+++ gcc/tree-scalar-evolution.cc
@@ -3881,7 +3881,7 @@ final_value_replacement_loop (class loop *loop)
/* Propagate constants immediately,
Applied Roger's proposed improvements with some changes:
Lengthy code is more convenient in avr.cc than in an insn
output function, and it makes it easy to work out the exact
instruction length. Moreover, the code can handle shifts
with offset zero (cases of *and3 insns).
Passed with no new
BEGIN:VCALENDAR
PRODID:-//Google Inc//Google Calendar 70.9054//EN
VERSION:2.0
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:REQUEST
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Europe/Paris
X-LIC-LOCATION:Europe/Paris
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0200
TZNAME:CEST
DTSTART:19700329T02
BEGIN:VCALENDAR
PRODID:-//Google Inc//Google Calendar 70.9054//EN
VERSION:2.0
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:REQUEST
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Europe/Paris
X-LIC-LOCATION:Europe/Paris
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0200
TZNAME:CEST
DTSTART:19700329T02
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114235
Bug ID: 114235
Summary: Object undefined is specific procedure for generic
overload in abstract type
Product: gcc
Version: 13.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114231
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13/14 regression] ICE |[12/13 Regression] ICE when
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
--- Comment #14 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 5 Mar 2024, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
>
> Jakub Jelinek changed:
>
>What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
--- Comment #13 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #12)
> Still, it would be nice to understand what changed
> optimize_function_for_size_p (cfun)
> after IPA. Is something adjusting node->count or node->frequency?
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114231
--- Comment #13 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7890836de20912bd92afaf5abbeaf9d8c5b86542
commit r14-9316-g7890836de20912bd92afaf5abbeaf9d8c5b86542
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114234
Bug ID: 114234
Summary: [14 Regression] verify_ssa failure with early-break
vectorisation
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
The following makes sure to use recognized patterns when vectorizing
roots during BB SLP discovery. We need to apply those late since
during root discovery we've not yet done pattern recognition.
All parts of the vectorizer assume patterns get used, for the testcase
we mix this up when doing live
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113441
--- Comment #44 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Sandiford from comment #42)
> Created attachment 57605 [details]
> proof-of-concept patch to suppress peeling for gaps
>
> How about the attached? It records whether all accesses
OK, I will solve the comparison operation first and then do some check over
other operations.
Regards,
Demin
From: juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
Sent: 2024年3月5日 17:02
To: Demin Han ; gcc-patches
Cc: kito.cheng ; pan2.li ; jeffreyalaw
; Robin Dapp ; richard.sandiford
Subject: Re: RE:[PATCH 3/5]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #10)
> Created attachment 57612 [details]
> Prototype patch
>
> Let's try this approach.
Yeah, I guess !TARGET_PARTIAL_REG_STALL || optimize_function_for_size_p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101523
--- Comment #15 from Sarah Julia Kriesch ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #13)
> (In reply to Sarah Julia Kriesch from comment #12)
> A bigger case of what? What do you mean?
Not only one software package is affected by this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-03-05
Assignee|unassigned
Ping
On 2/19/2024 10:11 AM, Saurabh Jha wrote:
On 2/9/2024 2:57 PM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
On 30/01/2024 17:07, Saurabh Jha wrote:
Hey,
Previously, this test was added to fix this bug:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112337. However, it did
not check the compilation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114231
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener ---
So the immediate reason is that between analysis and transform whether we
consider the shift vectorizable changes. That's because we code generated
a live lane which ended up changing operands in stmts
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
--- Comment #9 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
> > grep optimize_ insn-flags.h | wc -l
> 14
>
> so it's not very many standard patterns that would be affected. I'd say
> using these kind of flags on standard
On Tue, 2024-03-05 at 16:05 +0800, Guo Jie wrote:
> The constraint of op[1] is inconsistent with the output template.
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> * config/loongarch/loongarch.md
> (define_insn "*sge_"): Fix inconsistency
> error.
>
> ---
> Update in v2:
> Remove useless support
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114116
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114157
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114211
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[13/14 Regression] wrong|[13 Regression] wrong code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114211
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:aed445b0fd0c7ed16124c61e7eb732992426f103
commit r14-9315-gaed445b0fd0c7ed16124c61e7eb732992426f103
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
On Tue, 5 Mar 2024 at 09:31, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Tue, 5 Mar 2024 at 01:59, Dave Blanchard wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 10:06:34 +
> > Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 at 06:58, mokshagnareddyc--- via Gcc
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hello sir/mam
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114157
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9d2bc5def30830e685ae2e3c2f4d07b967e2be63
commit r14-9314-g9d2bc5def30830e685ae2e3c2f4d07b967e2be63
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
On Tue, 5 Mar 2024 at 01:59, Dave Blanchard wrote:
>
> On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 10:06:34 +
> Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 at 06:58, mokshagnareddyc--- via Gcc
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello sir/mam
> > > I am mokshagna reddy from Mahindra university and i am currently in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114116
--- Comment #15 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8ee6d13e32279faf9ef4fd8eabfba0adfca0dfb9
commit r14-9313-g8ee6d13e32279faf9ef4fd8eabfba0adfca0dfb9
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
Committed, thanks Juzhe.
Pan
From: juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2024 5:15 PM
To: Li, Pan2 ; gcc-patches
Cc: kito.cheng ; Wang, Yanzhang
; Li, Pan2
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] RISC-V: Cleanup unused code in riscv_v_adjust_bytesize
[NFC]
LGTM. Thanks for clean up.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114190
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
LGTM. Thanks for clean up.
juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
From: pan2.li
Date: 2024-03-05 16:59
To: gcc-patches
CC: juzhe.zhong; kito.cheng; yanzhang.wang; Pan Li
Subject: [PATCH v1] RISC-V: Cleanup unused code in riscv_v_adjust_bytesize [NFC]
From: Pan Li
Cleanup mode_size related code which is not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
> grep optimize_ insn-flags.h | wc -l
14
so it's not very many standard patterns that would be affected. I'd say
using these kind of flags on standard patterns is at least fragile?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
It's possibly on a cold path (yes, optimize_function_for_size_p should be
stable). Note though that optimize_function_for_size_p might in theory
change between vectorization and RTL expansion, so maybe
Yes. I think we are lacking some combine patterns to do all vector-scalar
combinations.
If you are interested at this topic, you can do some investigations on that (I
believe currently no body works on it for now).
I bet we should add some patterns for late-combine PASS for example:
(set (plus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
--- Comment #5 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Huh, it looks that optimize_function_for_size_p (cfun) is not stable during
LTO?!
Using:
--cut here--
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/mmx.md b/gcc/config/i386/mmx.md
index 2856ae6ffef..80114494b0b 100644
---
From: Pan Li
Cleanup mode_size related code which is not used anymore. Below tests are
passed for this patch.
* The RVV fully regresssion test.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* config/riscv/riscv.cc (riscv_v_adjust_bytesize): Cleanup unused
mode_size related code.
Signed-off-by: Pan Li
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114108
--- Comment #8 from Tejas Belagod ---
I find this transformation a bit odd:
...
pr114108.c:11:21: note: add new stmt: vect_patt_32.15_181 = .ABD
(vect__3.11_177, vect__7.14_180);
pr114108.c:11:21: note: -->vectorizing statement: patt_31
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114231
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
On Tue, 5 Mar 2024, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 05, 2024 at 09:27:22AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Tue, 5 Mar 2024, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > > The following patch adds support for BIT_FIELD_REF lowering with
> > > large/huge _BitInt lhs. BIT_FIELD_REF requires mode argument first
From: Cupertino Miranda
[Changes from V2]
- Fixed aarch64 new FAILs reported by Linaro CI.
- Fixed typos and other nits pointed out in V2.
[End of changes from V2]
PR debug/114186
DWARF DIEs of type DW_TAG_subrange_type are linked together to represent
the information about the subsequent
On Tue, Mar 05, 2024 at 09:29:38AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> I wonder if we need to care about extra temporaries on RTL before
> RA, thus whether always using a temporary would be OK?
I'd still need to do the resolve_reg_p check, otherwise if it is e.g. a
memory, the copying to temporary
On Tue, Mar 05, 2024 at 09:27:22AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Mar 2024, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > The following patch adds support for BIT_FIELD_REF lowering with
> > large/huge _BitInt lhs. BIT_FIELD_REF requires mode argument first
> > operand, so the operand shouldn't be any huge
On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 8:09 AM Li, Pan2 wrote:
>
> Thanks Richard for comments.
>
> > I do wonder what the existing usadd patterns with integer vector modes
> > in various targets do?
> > Those define_insn will at least not end up in the optab set I guess,
> > so they must end up
> > being either
Hi,
I applied the mentioned last_combine
patch(https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/gcc/patch/mptbka7em9w@arm.com/).
And did some initial tests.
Found that:
1. Float vector-scalar and vector-imm are OK
2. Integer vector-scalar is OK
3. Integer vector-imm(e.g. a[i] > 16) is
On Mon, Mar 4, 2024 at 9:40 PM Ken Matsui wrote:
>
> (x - y) CMP 0 is equivalent to x CMP y where x and y are signed
> integers and CMP is <, <=, >, or >=. Similarly, 0 CMP (x - y) is
> equivalent to y CMP x. As reported in PR middle-end/113680, this
> equivalence does not hold for types other
On Tue, 5 Mar 2024, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On the following testcase, we have
> (insn 10 7 11 2 (set (reg/v:TI 106 [ h ])
> (rotate:TI (reg/v:TI 106 [ h ])
> (const_int 64 [0x40]))) "pr114211.c":8:5 1042
> {rotl64ti2_doubleword}
> (nil))
> before subreg1 and the
On Tue, 5 Mar 2024, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> The following patch adds support for BIT_FIELD_REF lowering with
> large/huge _BitInt lhs. BIT_FIELD_REF requires mode argument first
> operand, so the operand shouldn't be any huge _BitInt.
> If we only access limbs from inside of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114232
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #0)
> (insn 160 159 161 26 (parallel [
> (set (reg:V2QI 250 [ vect_patt_207.470_183 ])
> (minus:V2QI (reg:V2QI 251)
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113441
--- Comment #43 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 4 Mar 2024, rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113441
>
> --- Comment #41 from Richard Sandiford ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from
The constraint of op[1] is inconsistent with the output template.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* config/loongarch/loongarch.md
(define_insn "*sge_"): Fix inconsistency
error.
---
Update in v2:
Remove useless support for op[1] is const_imm12_operand.
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114190
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
201 - 286 of 286 matches
Mail list logo
