https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97085
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a8d5c28233f95e3474ee8cbc4d341cbb43ab7bb6
commit r11-3431-ga8d5c28233f95e3474ee8cbc4d341cbb43ab7bb6
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97085
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zsojka at seznam dot cz
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97085
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97085
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:10843f8303509fcba880c6c05c08e4b4ccd24f36
commit r11-3426-g10843f8303509fcba880c6c05c08e4b4ccd24f36
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97085
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #6)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> > (In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #4)
> > > I would be happy with a revert of that patch, if the ARM backend
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97085
--- Comment #6 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> (In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #4)
> > I would be happy with a revert of that patch, if the ARM backend gets fixed,
> > but indeed a missed optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97085
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #4)
> I would be happy with a revert of that patch, if the ARM backend gets fixed,
> but indeed a missed optimization should not cause an ICE.
Not sure what the ARM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97085
--- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse ---
I would be happy with a revert of that patch, if the ARM backend gets fixed,
but indeed a missed optimization should not cause an ICE.
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> At least we're not at all
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97085
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
The following also works, and we then expand from
mask__31.28_102 = vect__50.25_95 != { 5, ... };
vect_patt_63.29_105 = VEC_COND_EXPR ;
diff --git a/gcc/match.pd b/gcc/match.pd
index
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97085
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
#1 0x015c8944 in gimple_expand_vec_cond_expr (gsi=0x7fffda50,
vec_cond_ssa_name_uses=0x7fffda20)
at ../../src/trunk/gcc/gimple-isel.cc:133
133 gcc_assert (known_eq
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97085
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97085
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
12 matches
Mail list logo
