On Sat, May 18, 2024, 9:17 PM wrote:
> From: Pan Li
>
> There are sorts of match pattern for SAT related cases, there will be
> some duplicated code to check the dest, op_0, op_1 are same tree types.
> Aka ternary tree type matches. Thus, extract one helper function to
> do this and avoid
From: Pan Li
There are sorts of match pattern for SAT related cases, there will be
some duplicated code to check the dest, op_0, op_1 are same tree types.
Aka ternary tree type matches. Thus, extract one helper function to
do this and avoid match code duplication.
The below test suites are
Repost, this time with the RISC-V tag so it's picked up by the CI system.
This fixes a minor bug that showed up in the CI system, presumably with
fuzz testing.
Under the right circumstances, we could end trying to emit a shift-add
style sequence where the to-be-shifted operand was not a
Hi Botcazou,
Just notice that this patch may result in some ICE when build libc++ for the
riscv port, details as below.
Please note not all configuration can reproduce this issue, feel free to ping
me if you cannot reproduce this issue. CC more riscv port people for awareness.
during GIMPLE
The problem here is even if last_and_only_stmt returns a statement,
the bb might still contain a phi node which defines a ssa name
which is used in that statement so we need to add a check to make sure
that the phi nodes are empty for the middle bbs in both the
`CMP?MINMAX:MINMAX` case and the
This fixes a minor bug that showed up in the CI system, presumably with
fuzz testing.
Under the right circumstances, we could end trying to emit a shift-add
style sequence where the to-be-shifted operand was not a register. This
naturally leads to an unrecognized insn.
The circumstances
Bootstrapped and regression tested on x86_64
c23: Fix for redeclared enumerator initialized with different type
[PR115109]
c23 specifies that the type of a redeclared enumerator is the one of the
previous declaration. Convert initializers with different type accordingly
On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 8:07 PM HAO CHEN GUI wrote:
>
> Hi,
> This patch adds an optab for __builtin_isfinite. The finite check can be
> implemented on rs6000 by a single instruction. It needs an optab to be
> expanded to the certain sequence of instructions.
>
> The subsequent patches will
On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 1:10 AM HAO CHEN GUI wrote:
>
> Hi,
> This patch adds an optab for __builtin_isnormal. The normal check can be
> implemented on rs6000 by a single instruction. It needs an optab to be
> expanded to the certain sequence of instructions.
>
> The subsequent patches will
(correct email)
> We did not propagate C_TYPE_VARIABLY_MODIFIED to pointers in all
> cases. I added this directly in two places, but maybe we should
> check all cases of build_pointer_type or integrate this into
> c_build_pointer_type and use this everywhere (but I do not fully
> understand
We did not propagate C_TYPE_VARIABLY_MODIFIED to pointers in all
cases. I added this directly in two places, but maybe we should
check all cases of build_pointer_type or integrate this into
c_build_pointer_type and use this everywhere (but I do not fully
understand the pointer mode logic
Applied as obvious,
Johann
--
Author: Wolfgang Hospital
Date: Sat May 18 15:02:51 2024 +0200
AVR: target/115065 - Tweak __clzhi2.
The libgcc implementation of __clzhi2 can be tweaked by
one cycle in some situations by re-arranging the instructions.
It also reduces the WCET
Another instance I found. With that wwwdocs should be consistent.
Pushed.
Gerald
---
htdocs/egcs-1.1/index.html | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/htdocs/egcs-1.1/index.html b/htdocs/egcs-1.1/index.html
index 5db4e342..a62ed3df 100644
---
Hello Alex:
On 16/05/24 10:21 pm, Alex Coplan wrote:
> Hi Ajit,
>
> Thanks a lot for working through the review feedback.
>
> The patch LGTM with the two minor suggested changes below. I can't
> approve the patch, though, so you'll need an OK from Richard S.
>
> Also, I'm not sure if it makes
Hello Richard:
On 17/05/24 11:07 pm, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Ajit Agarwal writes:
>> Hello Alex/Richard:
>>
>> All review comments are addressed.
>>
>> Common infrastructure of load store pair fusion is divided into target
>> independent and target dependent changed code.
>>
>> Target
Hello Alex/Richard:
All comments are addressed.
Common infrastructure of load store pair fusion is divided into target
independent and target dependent changed code.
Target independent code is the Generic code with pure virtual function
to interface between target independent and dependent
On Sat, May 18, 2024 at 3:25 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Sat, May 18, 2024 at 02:53:20PM +0800, Kefu Chai wrote:
> > libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
> >
> > * include/bits/unicode.h (enable_borrowed_range): Call ++(*this)
> > instead of ++this
>
> This should be already fixed, see
On Sat, May 18, 2024 at 02:53:20PM +0800, Kefu Chai wrote:
> libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
>
> * include/bits/unicode.h (enable_borrowed_range): Call ++(*this)
> instead of ++this
This should be already fixed, see https://gcc.gnu.org/PR115119
Jakub
From: Kefu Chai
in _Grapheme_cluster_view::_Iterator, we implement its post-increment
operator (a++) using its pre-increment opereator (++a). but we use
++this
to call the pre-increment opereator in the implementation of the
post-increment operator. one cannot assign to `this`. both GCC and
19 matches
Mail list logo
