On Thu, Aug 7, 2025 at 8:23 PM Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 07, 2025 at 08:12:44PM +0200, Toon Moene wrote:
> > On 8/7/25 18:38, Andrew Pinski (QUIC) via Gcc wrote:
> >
> > > So looking into https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121448, I
> > > Noticed the options needed to
Snapshot gcc-13-20250807 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/13-20250807/
and on various mirrors, see https://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 13 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
I bootstrapped and tested on Power8 and Power9 BE in both 32-bit and
64-bit modes, and on Power8, Power9 & Power10 LE in 64-bit mode, and
everything looks good.
On 01/08/25 6:35 pm, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
> The first release candidate for GCC 15.2 is available from
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org
I bootstrapped and tested on Power8 and Power9 BE in both 32-bit and
64-bit modes, and on Power8, Power9 & Power10 LE in 64-bit mode, and
everything looks good.
On 01/08/25 6:35 pm, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
> The first release candidate for GCC 15.2 is available from
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org
On Thu, Aug 07, 2025 at 03:25:45PM +, Thomas de Bock wrote:
> "I see what you mean, I think there is probably no way to apply the
> optimization to all functions then indeed, since there is no way to
> know if the early break on inequality of a field was arbitrary
> or because it indicates the
On 8/7/25 18:38, Andrew Pinski (QUIC) via Gcc wrote:
So looking into https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121448, I Noticed
the options needed to hit this is `-fsignaling-nans -ffinite-math-only`. These
2 options seems contradictory. Should -ffinite-math-only turn off signaling
nans?
On Thu, Aug 07, 2025 at 08:12:44PM +0200, Toon Moene wrote:
> On 8/7/25 18:38, Andrew Pinski (QUIC) via Gcc wrote:
>
> > So looking into https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121448, I
> > Noticed the options needed to hit this is `-fsignaling-nans
> > -ffinite-math-only`. These 2 options
So looking into https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121448, I Noticed
the options needed to hit this is `-fsignaling-nans -ffinite-math-only`. These
2 options seems contradictory. Should -ffinite-math-only turn off signaling
nans? Give a warning or something else?
Thanks,
Andrew
> On Thu, Aug 07, 2025 at 09:37:24AM +, Thomas de Bock wrote:
> > Why does that it not matter that the destination of all the chain blocks'
> > FALSE edge is the same, if we have:
> > :
> > _1 = this_13(D)->a;
> > _2 = _14(D)->a;
> > if (_1 == _2)
> > goto ; [INV]
> > else
> > goto ; [INV]
On Thu, Aug 7, 2025 at 7:18 AM Florian Weimer via Gcc wrote:
>
> * Thomas de Bock via Gcc:
>
> > Sorry for my wording, that is not the only thing memcmp gives us, but it
> > does not give us information regarding which fields mismatched. So we cannot
> > deal with (after !='s are converted to =='s
On Thu, Aug 07, 2025 at 09:37:24AM +, Thomas de Bock wrote:
> Why does that it not matter that the destination of all the chain blocks'
> FALSE edge is the same, if we have:
> :
> _1 = this_13(D)->a;
> _2 = _14(D)->a;
> if (_1 == _2)
> goto ; [INV]
> else
> goto ; [INV]
> :
> _3 = this_13
* Thomas de Bock via Gcc:
> Sorry for my wording, that is not the only thing memcmp gives us, but it
> does not give us information regarding which fields mismatched. So we cannot
> deal with (after !='s are converted to =='s) blocks where not all blocks in
> a chain have the same node as their (e
> > Apologies if I was unclear or misunderstand, I believe that's exactly what
> > I am
> > doing right now. I change the !='s' to =='s' and switch their true with
> > their false
> > edge, from there we can simply find the equality edge by finding the TRUE
> > edge.
> > If this is an unwelcome
13 matches
Mail list logo
