[Bug target/90545] [10 regression] gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-splats-floatdouble.c fails starting with r271022

[amodra at gmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90545

Alan Modra  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |FIXED

--- Comment #2 from Alan Modra  ---
Patch applied.

[Bug target/90545] [10 regression] gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-splats-floatdouble.c fails starting with r271022

[amodra at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90545

--- Comment #1 from Alan Modra  ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue May 21 13:36:04 2019
New Revision: 271464

URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271464=gcc=rev
Log:
PR90545, gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-splats-floatdouble.c fails

I figure a tweak to register_move_cost is better than sprinkling ?s
in instruction operand alternatives.

PR target/90545
* config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_register_move_cost): Increase
power9 direct move cost.
* testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-splats-floatdouble.c:
Correct comments and rename functions to suit parameters.

Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-splats-floatdouble.c

[Bug target/90545] [10 regression] gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-splats-floatdouble.c fails starting with r271022

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90545

Richard Biener  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|--- |10.0

[Bug target/90545] [10 regression] gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-splats-floatdouble.c fails starting with r271022

[amodra at gmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90545

Alan Modra  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
   Last reconfirmed||2019-05-21
 CC|amodra at gcc dot gnu.org  |
   Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org  |amodra at gmail dot com
 Ever confirmed|0   |1