https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94461
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94461
--- Comment #15 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a13d6ec867e750169af95649235a6681f410464a
commit r10-7543-ga13d6ec867e750169af95649235a6681f410464a
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94461
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #48182|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94461
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 48187
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48187=edit
gcc10-pr94461-wip2.patch
Here is what I have right now and it passes make check-{gcc,c++-all}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94461
--- Comment #12 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 48186
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48186=edit
An incomplete patch
Jakub, this is an incomplete patch with 2 testcases. Can you take it over?
I will fix PR 94467.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94461
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
It doesn't work as is though, looking at it now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94461
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 48182
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48182=edit
gcc10-pr94461-wip.patch
What I'm proposing is essentially this patch (+ the testcase of course).
Or, instead of isa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94461
--- Comment #9 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #8)
> So, I believe the r10-400-gecfdb16c54ad06ac23193e5de292fc71e5958526 change
> has been incorrect.
> We should revert those i386-builtin.def changes, and instead treat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94461
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So, I believe the r10-400-gecfdb16c54ad06ac23193e5de292fc71e5958526 change has
been incorrect.
We should revert those i386-builtin.def changes, and instead treat builtins
with sole OPTION_MASK_ISA_MMX (and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94461
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
As I said in PR90497, the PR79565/PR82483 changes made SSE{,2,3} | MMX in
i386-builtins.def mean that both the SSE* and MMX must be enabled, rather than
either one or the other. Now, with MMX_WITH_SSE, if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94461
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #3)
> It looks to me that the fix for PR90497 is not entirely correct, because it
> allows to bypass builtins that have additional SSE* restrictions.
>
> The following test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94461
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
The following ones:
BDESC (OPTION_MASK_ISA_SSE2 | OPTION_MASK_ISA_MMX, 0, CODE_FOR_sse2_cvtpd2pi,
"__builtin_ia32_cvtpd2pi", IX86_BUILTIN_CVTPD2PI, UNKNOWN, (int)
V2SI_FTYPE_V2DF)
BDESC (OPTION_MASK_ISA_SSE2 |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94461
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
Why do we have
define_expand "sse2_umulv1siv1di3"
[(set (match_operand:V1DI 0 "register_operand")
(mult:V1DI
(zero_extend:V1DI
(vec_select:V1SI
(match_operand:V2SI 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94461
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94461
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94461
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94461
--- Comment #1 from Zdenek Sojka ---
This seems to affect sse3 intrinsics as well:
$ gcc-10 testcase-min0.i -w
testcase-min0.i: In function 'foo0':
testcase-min0.i:15:1: error: unrecognizable insn:
15 | }
| ^
(insn 28 27 29 2 (set
17 matches
Mail list logo
