[Bug target/53291] Code generated for xtest is wrong

2012-08-22 Thread eraman at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53291 --- Comment #11 from eraman at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-22 21:07:39 UTC --- Author: eraman Date: Wed Aug 22 21:07:30 2012 New Revision: 190601 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=190601 Log: 2012-08-22 Easwaran Raman

[Bug target/53291] Code generated for xtest is wrong

2012-05-11 Thread ubizjak at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53291 Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED

[Bug target/53291] Code generated for xtest is wrong

2012-05-10 Thread ubizjak at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53291 --- Comment #4 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2012-05-10 19:46:43 UTC --- I am confused... is there anything wrong with current implementation or not?

[Bug target/53291] Code generated for xtest is wrong

2012-05-10 Thread ubizjak at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53291 --- Comment #5 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2012-05-10 20:00:45 UTC --- Try this patch: Index: config/i386/i386.md === --- config/i386/i386.md (revision 187372) +++

[Bug target/53291] Code generated for xtest is wrong

2012-05-10 Thread andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53291 --- Comment #6 from Andi Kleen andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2012-05-10 22:52:30 UTC --- Uros patch fixes it and the code is correct now. Please commit. However in testing it I quickly hit PR53315

[Bug target/53291] Code generated for xtest is wrong

2012-05-10 Thread uros at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53291 --- Comment #7 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-10 23:31:14 UTC --- Author: uros Date: Thu May 10 23:31:03 2012 New Revision: 187387 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=187387 Log: PR target/53291 * config/i386/i386.md

[Bug target/53291] Code generated for xtest is wrong

2012-05-10 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53291 --- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-05-11 02:41:55 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) (In reply to comment #1) Testcase? It is trivial, so posting right here: We need a run-time testcase.

[Bug target/53291] Code generated for xtest is wrong

2012-05-10 Thread andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53291 --- Comment #9 from Andi Kleen andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2012-05-11 03:36:11 UTC --- The example in PR53315 is a runtime test case, except: - it needs cpuid checks to be part of the test suite - the printfs need to be replaced with asserts -

[Bug target/53291] Code generated for xtest is wrong

2012-05-09 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53291 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last

[Bug target/53291] Code generated for xtest is wrong

2012-05-09 Thread kirill.yukhin at intel dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53291 --- Comment #2 from Yukhin Kirill kirill.yukhin at intel dot com 2012-05-09 16:53:12 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) Testcase? It is trivial, so posting right here: #include immintrin.h unsigned a; int rtm_xtest (void) { if (_xtest ())

[Bug target/53291] Code generated for xtest is wrong

2012-05-09 Thread andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53291 --- Comment #3 from Andi Kleen andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2012-05-09 17:17:56 UTC --- Correction. We can keep the xor %reg,%reg. We just need it because setnz only sets 8 bit to initialize the higher order bits. Alternatively the value can