Re: [PATCH 3/3, v2] rs6000: Add testsuite test cases for MMA built-ins.

On 6/19/20 11:53 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > Okay for trunk. Thanks! I committed this along with patch2, so it was pushed upstream with it. Thanks! Peter

Re: [PATCH 2/3, v2] rs6000: Add MMA built-in function definitions

On 6/19/20 12:06 PM, Peter Bergner wrote: > On 6/19/20 11:45 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: >>> +(define_insn_and_split "*mma_assemble_acc" >>> + [(set (match_operand:PXI 0 "fpr_reg_operand" "=d") >>> + (unspec:PXI [(match_operand:PXI 1 "mma_input_operand" "mwa") >>> +

Re: [PATCH 1/3, v2] rs6000: Add base support and types for defining MMA built-ins.

On 6/19/20 11:47 AM, Peter Bergner wrote: >>> +;; Special pattern to prevent DSE from generating an internal error if it >>> +;; notices a structure copy that it wants to eliminate. This generates >>> pretty >>> +;; bad code, but at least it doesn't die. >>> +(define_insn_and_split "truncpoidi2"

Re: [PATCH] Fix target clone indirection elimination.

On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 8:16 PM Yichao Yu wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 3:41 PM Yichao Yu wrote: > > > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 3:26 PM Yichao Yu wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 3:25 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 12:20 PM Yichao Yu wrote: > > > > >

Re: [PATCH] Fix target clone indirection elimination.

On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 3:41 PM Yichao Yu wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 3:26 PM Yichao Yu wrote: > > > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 3:25 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 12:20 PM Yichao Yu wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 3:12 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > > >

[PATCH] x86: Skip EXT_REX_SSE_REG_P for vzeroupper optimization

Skip EXT_REX_SSE_REG_P for vzeroupper optimization since upper 16 vector registers don't trigger SSE <-> AVX transition penalty. gcc/ PR target/95791 * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_dirflag_mode_needed): Skip EXT_REX_SSE_REG_P. gcc/testsuite/ PR target/95791

Re: [PATCH] Treat { 0 } specially for structs with the designated_init attribute.

On 6/14/20 11:05 AM, Asher Gordon wrote: Hello, Asher Gordon writes: I also added a note after the warning showing where the field was defined in the structure, like this: inform (DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (info.field), "in definition of %qT", constructor_type); However, I

Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Normalize arch string in driver time

On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 2:53 AM Kito Cheng wrote: > * config/riscv/riscv.h (DRIVER_SELF_SPECS): New. This looks good to me. This has the side effect that we are now passing -march twice to cc1 and as, but that should be harmless as the last one wins. I think this makes the

Re: [PATCH] Fix target clone indirection elimination.

On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 3:26 PM Yichao Yu wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 3:25 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 12:20 PM Yichao Yu wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 3:12 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 11:37 AM Yichao Yu wrote: > > > > >

RE: [PATCH] simplify-rtx: Two easy pieces.

Hi! Good to see you "back"! On Sat, 20 Jun 2020, Roger Sayle wrote: > Thanks to you too. Alas, my credentials from the CVS days of GCC almost > certainly don't > work any more (in git), My guess is that your credentials are fine (possibly modulo FSF assignment issues) if it wasn't for the ssh

Re: [PATCH] Fix target clone indirection elimination.

On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 3:25 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 12:20 PM Yichao Yu wrote: > > > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 3:12 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 11:37 AM Yichao Yu wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 1:54 PM Yichao Yu wrote: > > > > >

Re: [PATCH] Fix target clone indirection elimination.

On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 12:20 PM Yichao Yu wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 3:12 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 11:37 AM Yichao Yu wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 1:54 PM Yichao Yu wrote: > > > > > > > > > > The current logic seems to be comparing the whole

Re: [PATCH] Fix target clone indirection elimination.

sp call__cpu_indicator_init@PLT movq__cpu_model@GOTPCREL(%rip), %rax leaq_ZL2f2Pi.avx2.0(%rip), %rdx testb $4, 13(%rax) leaq_ZL2f2Pi.default.1(%rip), %rax cmovne %rdx, %rax addq$8, %rsp ret .size _ZL2f2Pi.re

Re: [PATCH] Fix target clone indirection elimination.

On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 11:37 AM Yichao Yu wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 1:54 PM Yichao Yu wrote: > > > > > > The current logic seems to be comparing the whole attribute tree > > > > between the callee > > > > and caller (or at least the tree starting from the target attribute). > > > >

Re: [PATCH] Fix target clone indirection elimination.

> https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/commit/b8ce8129a560f64f8b2855c4a3812b7c3c0ebf3f#diff-e2d535917af8555baad2e9c8749e96a5 > with/adding to the test the following one should work. I still > couldn't get test to run though.. And yet another related issue that I think I would appreciate some

Re: [PATCH] Fix target clone indirection elimination.

On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 1:54 PM Yichao Yu wrote: > > > > The current logic seems to be comparing the whole attribute tree between > > > the callee > > > and caller (or at least the tree starting from the target attribute). > > > This is unnecessary and causes strange dependency of the

[PATCHv3] Handle TYPE_PACK_EXPANSION in cxx_incomplete_type_diagnostic

From: Nicholas Krause This fixs the PR95672 by adding the missing TYPE_PACK_EXPANSION case in cxx_incomplete_type_diagnostic in order to avoid ICES on diagnosing incomplete template pack expansion cases. In v2, add the missing required test case for all new patches. v3 Fixes both the test case

Re: [PATCH] Fix target clone indirection elimination.

> > The current logic seems to be comparing the whole attribute tree between > > the callee > > and caller (or at least the tree starting from the target attribute). > > This is unnecessary and causes strange dependency of the indirection > > elimination on unrelated properties like

Re: [PATCH] Fix target clone indirection elimination.

On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 9:17 AM Yichao Yu via Gcc-patches wrote: > > The current logic seems to be comparing the whole attribute tree between the > callee > and caller (or at least the tree starting from the target attribute). > This is unnecessary and causes strange dependency of the

Re: [PATCH] Treat { 0 } specially for structs with the designated_init attribute.

Hi, Any chance of this patch getting applied soon? Asher Gordon writes: > Actually, it would be ideal to point to the attribute itself, so a > note something like the following could be produced: > > test.c:4:22: note: ‘designated_init’ attribute applied here > 4 | struct

RE: [PATCH] simplify-rtx: Two easy pieces.

Hi Segher, It's great to hear from you again. It's been a while. >On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 09:42:54PM +0100, Roger Sayle wrote: >> My recent patch to add scalar integer simplification unit tests to >> simplify_rtx_c_tests identified two "trivial" corner cases that could be improved in

[PATCH] Fix target clone indirection elimination.

The current logic seems to be comparing the whole attribute tree between the callee and caller (or at least the tree starting from the target attribute). This is unnecessary and causes strange dependency of the indirection elimination on unrelated properties like `noinline`(PR95780) and

[PATCH] Fix target clone indirection elimination (PR95778, PR95780)

The current logic seems to be comparing the whole attribute tree between the callee and caller (or at least the tree starting from the target attribute). This is unnecessary and causes strange dependency of the indirection elimination on unrelated properties like `noinline`(PR95780) and

[pushed] c++: Refinements to "more constrained".

P2113 from the last C++ meeting clarified that we only compare constraints on functions or function templates that have equivalent template parameters and function parameters. I'm not currently implementing the complicated handling of reversed comparison operators here; thinking about it now, it

Re: PING^2: V5 [PATCH] x86: Move cpuinfo.h from libgcc to common/config/i386

On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 10:11 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 9:35 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 6:27 AM Martin Liška wrote: > > > > > > On 5/26/20 1:59 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 2:30 AM Martin Liška wrote: > > > >> > > > >> On 5/25/20

Support to check vliw overlapping register constraint created by regrename, please help to review, thanks

In some target, it is limited to issue two insns with change the same register.(The insn 73 start with insn:TI, so it will be issued together with others insns until a new insn start with insn:TI, such as insn 71) The regrename can known the mode V2VF in insn 73 need two successive registers,

Re: [PATCH] simplify-rtx: Two easy pieces.

Hi! On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 09:42:54PM +0100, Roger Sayle wrote: > My recent patch to add scalar integer simplification unit tests to > simplify_rtx_c_tests > identified two "trivial" corner cases that could be improved in > simplify-rtx.c. These two things are independent changes and should

Re: [patch] Add swap files for vim to .gitignore

Hi! On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 12:10:22PM +0200, Thomas Koenig via Gcc-patches wrote: > Add swap files for vim to .gitignore. > > This patch adds the most common swap files for vim to .gitignore. The > editor may leave those behind if is stopped or crashes. We already > do the same kind of things

Re: [PATCH] Fortran : ICE in gfc_check_reshape PR95585

Hi Mark, Please find attached fix for PR95585. OK to commit and backport? OK for master. For backport: Again, I am not sure we need this, but the fix is simple enough. So, I probably wouldn't backport this (it's not a regression), but I'll leave that up to you. Regards Thomas

Re: [PATCH] Fortran : Missing gcc-internal-format PR42693

Am 17.06.20 um 09:10 schrieb Mark Eggleston: Please find attached patch for PR42693. OK to commit and backport? OK for trunk. For backporting, it makes little sense since nobody is going to do a new translation for the existing branches. Regards Thomas

[patch] Add swap files for vim to .gitignore

Add swap files for vim to .gitignore. This patch adds the most common swap files for vim to .gitignore. The editor may leave those behind if is stopped or crashes. We already do the same kind of things for emacs. ChangeLog: * .gitignore: Add swap files for vim. diff --git

Re: [PATCH] Fortran : ICE in gfc_validate_kind PR95586

Hi Mark, OK to commit OK for master. Since, according to the PR, this is not a regression and this is an ICE on invalid, I don't think a backport is needed. On the other hand, the patch is simple enough that I am quite certain that it will not hurt. So, I'll leave that up to you. Best

Re: [PATCH] Fortran : ICE in resolve_fl_procedure PR95708

Hi Mark, Please find attached a fix for PR95708. OK for commit and backport? OK (it's a regression, after all). Thanks! Regards Thomas

Re: [PATCH] PR fortran/95587 - ICE in gfc_target_encode_expr, at fortran/target-memory.c:362

Hi Harald, OK for master? OK. Thanks for the patch! Regards Thomas

Re: [PATCH] PR fortran/95688 - ICE in gfc_get_string, at fortran/iresolve.c:70

Hi Harald, OK for trunk? Backport if suitable? Yes for both. Thanks for the patch! Regards Thomas

Re: [PATCH] PR fortran/95687 - ICE in get_unique_hashed_string, at fortran/class.c:508

Hi Harald, Regtested again. OK now? OK. Thanks for the patch! Regards Thomas

Re: [PATCH] PR fortran/95707 - ICE in finish_equivalences, at fortran/trans-common.c:1319

Am 17.06.20 um 21:27 schrieb Harald Anlauf: OK for master / backports? OK. Thanks for the patch! Regards Thomas