Re: [x86_PATCH] peephole2 to resolve failure of gcc.target/i386/pr43644-2.c

2023-12-31 Thread Uros Bizjak
On Sun, Dec 31, 2023 at 4:56 PM Roger Sayle wrote: > > > Hi Uros, > > > From: Uros Bizjak > > Sent: 28 December 2023 10:33 > > On Fri, Dec 22, 2023 at 11:14 AM Roger Sayle > > wrote: > > > > > > This patch resolves the failure of pr43644-2.c in the testsuite, a > > > code quality test I added

RE: [x86_PATCH] peephole2 to resolve failure of gcc.target/i386/pr43644-2.c

2023-12-31 Thread Roger Sayle
Hi Uros, > From: Uros Bizjak > Sent: 28 December 2023 10:33 > On Fri, Dec 22, 2023 at 11:14 AM Roger Sayle > wrote: > > > > This patch resolves the failure of pr43644-2.c in the testsuite, a > > code quality test I added back in July, that started failing as the > > code GCC generates for

Re: [x86_PATCH] peephole2 to resolve failure of gcc.target/i386/pr43644-2.c

2023-12-28 Thread Uros Bizjak
On Fri, Dec 22, 2023 at 11:14 AM Roger Sayle wrote: > > > This patch resolves the failure of pr43644-2.c in the testsuite, a code > quality test I added back in July, that started failing as the code GCC > generates for 128-bit values (and their parameter passing) has been in > flux. After a few

[x86_PATCH] peephole2 to resolve failure of gcc.target/i386/pr43644-2.c

2023-12-22 Thread Roger Sayle
This patch resolves the failure of pr43644-2.c in the testsuite, a code quality test I added back in July, that started failing as the code GCC generates for 128-bit values (and their parameter passing) has been in flux. After a few attempts at tweaking pattern constraints in the hope of