On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 03:03:19PM +, Michael Matz via Gcc wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, 20 Jun 2023, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote:
>
> > ce1 pass results in emit_conditional_move with
> > (gt (reg/v:SF 83 [ x ]) (reg:SF 84)), (reg/v:SF 83 [ x ]), (reg:SF 84)
> > operands in the GCC 11 case and
Hello,
On Tue, 20 Jun 2023, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote:
> ce1 pass results in emit_conditional_move with
> (gt (reg/v:SF 83 [ x ]) (reg:SF 84)), (reg/v:SF 83 [ x ]), (reg:SF 84)
> operands in the GCC 11 case and so is successfully matched by
> ix86_expand_fp_movcc as ix86_expand_sse_fp_minmax.
On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 10:15:37AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 9:45 PM Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 09:10:53PM +0200, André Günther via Gcc wrote:
> > > I noticed that a simple function like
> > > auto relu( float x ) {
> > > return x
On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 9:45 PM Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 09:10:53PM +0200, André Günther via Gcc wrote:
> > I noticed that a simple function like
> > auto relu( float x ) {
> > return x > 0.f ? x : 0.f;
> > }
> > compiles to different ASM using GCC11 (or lower)
On Mon, 19 Jun 2023, André Günther via Gcc wrote:
I noticed that a simple function like
auto relu( float x ) {
return x > 0.f ? x : 0.f;
}
compiles to different ASM using GCC11 (or lower) and GCC12 (or higher). On
-O3 -mavx2 the former compiles above function to
relu(float):
vmaxss xmm0,
On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 09:10:53PM +0200, André Günther via Gcc wrote:
> I noticed that a simple function like
> auto relu( float x ) {
> return x > 0.f ? x : 0.f;
> }
> compiles to different ASM using GCC11 (or lower) and GCC12 (or higher). On
> -O3 -mavx2 the former compiles above function
Hi,
I noticed that a simple function like
auto relu( float x ) {
return x > 0.f ? x : 0.f;
}
compiles to different ASM using GCC11 (or lower) and GCC12 (or higher). On
-O3 -mavx2 the former compiles above function to
relu(float):
vmaxss xmm0, xmm0, DWORD PTR .LC0[rip]
ret
.LC0:
