https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69305
--- Comment #13 from Richard Henderson ---
Author: rth
Date: Thu Jan 28 17:48:22 2016
New Revision: 232936
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232936&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/69305
* config/aarch64/aarch64-modes.def (CC_Cmode): New
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69305
--- Comment #12 from Richard Henderson ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-01/msg01829.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69305
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69305
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69305
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rth at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69305
--- Comment #8 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7)
> The patterns are just weird.
All that comes from the addti3 expander in aarch64.md
If I delete it the testcase doesn't abort.
I'll have a closer loo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69305
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The patterns are just weird.
(insn 10 7 11 2 (parallel [
(set (reg:CC_NZ 66 cc)
(compare:CC_NZ (plus:DI (reg:DI 79)
(reg:DI 85 [ x ]))
(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69305
--- Comment #6 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to ktkachov from comment #5)
> Confirmed as well.
> If combine changed the plus-compare into a minus-compare, shouldn't it also
> go into the condition code usage and update that too th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69305
--- Comment #5 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Confirmed as well.
If combine changed the plus-compare into a minus-compare, shouldn't it also go
into the condition code usage and update that too though?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69305
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69305
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Looks like aarch64 backend bug to me.
unsigned __int128 f1 (unsigned __int128 x, unsigned __int128 y) { return x + y;
}
unsigned __int128 f2 (unsigned __int128 x, unsigned __int128 y) { return x - y;
}
unsign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69305
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|6.0 |5.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69305
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milest
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69305
Zdenek Sojka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69305
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
15 matches
Mail list logo