Re: [PATCH] x86: Provide expanders for truncdisi2 and friends.

On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 1:29 AM Roger Sayle wrote: > > > Even by my standards, this is an odd patch. This adds expanders to > i386.md requesting that integer truncations be represented in RTL > using SUBREGs. This exactly matches the (current) default behaviour > when TARGET_TRULY_NOOP_TRUNCATIO

Re: [PATCH] middle-end: Remove truly_noop_truncation check from convert.c

On Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 8:29 PM Roger Sayle wrote: > > > This patch eliminates a check of targetm.truly_noop_truncation from > the early middle-end, where the gimple/generic being generated by > GCC's front-ends is being inappropriately influenced by the target's > TRULY_NOOP_TRUNCATION. The (rec

Re: [PATCH] rs6000: Define movsf_from_si2 to extract high part SF element from DImode[PR89310]

Hi, On 2020/7/11 08:54, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > Hi! > > On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 09:39:40AM +0800, luoxhu wrote: >> OK, seems the md file needs a format tool too... > > Heh. Just make sure it looks good (that is, does what it looks like), > looks like the rest, etc. It's hard to do anything

Re: [PATCH] ipa-devirt: Fix crash in obj_type_ref_class [PR95114]

On Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 10:21 AM Richard Sandiford wrote: > > Jan Hubicka writes: > >> Jan Hubicka writes: > >> >> The testcase has failed since r9-5035, because obj_type_ref_class > >> >> tries to look up an ODR type when no ODR type information is > >> >> available. (The information was avail

Re: RFA: Fix combine.c combining a move and a non-move into two non-moves, PR93372

> From: Segher Boessenkool > Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2020 22:50:43 +0200 > I'll make a simpler patch. Thanks! You're welcome. So, you'll take care of the updated patch yourself? (I'll wait a month before sending an update either way.) brgds, H-P

Re: RFA: Fix combine.c combining a move and a non-move into two non-moves, PR93372

> From: Segher Boessenkool > Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2020 22:23:59 +0200 > Hi! > > On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 02:50:09AM +0200, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 03:11:17AM +0200, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > > > TL;DR: fixing a misdetection of what is a "simple move". > > > > > >

Re: [PATCH 2/2] doc/implement-c.texi: About same-as-scalar-type volatile aggregate accesses, PR94600

> From: Richard Biener > Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2020 09:00:22 +0200 > On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 6:03 AM Hans-Peter Nilsson via Gcc-patches > wrote: > > > > We say very little about reads and writes to aggregate / > > compound objects, just scalar objects (i.e. assignments don't > > cause reads). Let's l

Re: [PATCH 2/2] doc/implement-c.texi: About same-as-scalar-type volatile aggregate accesses, PR94600

> From: Martin Sebor > Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2020 02:09:37 +0200 > On 7/6/20 10:02 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson via Gcc-patches wrote: > > We say very little about reads and writes to aggregate / > > compound objects, just scalar objects (i.e. assignments don't > > cause reads). Let's lets say something sa

Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Fix regular expression in target-specific test

Hi Simon: Thanks for your fix! Hi Jim: Yeah, I think I should check the dejagnu errors. On Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 12:46 PM Jim Wilson wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 6:53 AM Simon Cook wrote: > > Some square brackets were missing escape characters, causing DejaGnu to > > try and call a proc

RE: [wwwdocs PATCH] remove tree-browser page and links

> On Thu, 9 Jul 2020, Richard Sandiford wrote: > >> I'm trying Tree Browser during debugging, but failed. > >> I found that tree-browser.c and tree-browser.def have been removed at > >> 2015-07-25. So, to avoid misunderstanding, can we remove this > >> tree-browser page too? > > Thanks for the patc

Re: [PATCH 2/2] rs6000: Define define_insn_and_split to split unspec sldi+or to rldimi

On 2020/7/11 08:28, Segher Boessenkool wrote: Hi! On Thu, Jul 09, 2020 at 09:14:45PM -0500, Xiong Hu Luo wrote: * config/rs6000/rs6000.md (rotl_unspec): New define_insn_and_split. +; rldimi with UNSPEC_SI_FROM_SF. +(define_insn_and_split "*rotl_unspec" Please have rotldi

Re: [PATCH] [RISC-V] Add support for TLS stack protector canary access

On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 7:51 PM cooper wrote: > gcc/ > * config/riscv/riscv-opts.h (stack_protector_guard): New enum. > * config/riscv/riscv.c (riscv_option_override): Handle > the new options. > * config/riscv/riscv.md (stack_protect_set): New pattern to handle >

[PATCH] libgccjit: Handle truncation and extension for casts [PR 95498]

Hello. As mentioned in bug 95498, some conversions do not work. After investigation, it turns out that it's caused by multiple casts on an expression where it should do a truncation/extension. I added a testcase, but for some reasons, the tests only pass when ran via `./testsuite/jit/test-ca

[PATCH] aarch64: Delete duplicated option docs.

Noticed while reviewing the RISC-V -mstack-protector-guard docs. The AArch64 section has two identical copies of the docs for this option. * doc/invoke.texi (AArch64 Options): Delete duplicate -mstack-protector-guard docs. --- gcc/doc/invoke.texi | 18 -- 1 file c

RE: [Patch][gcn, nvptx, offloading] mkoffload – handle -fpic/-fPIC

>-Original Message- >From: Gcc-patches [mailto:gcc-patches-boun...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf >Of Tom de Vries >Sent: Friday, July 3, 2020 6:52 AM >To: Moore, Catherine ; Burnus, Tobias >; gcc-patches ; >Jakub Jelinek >Cc: Schwinge, Thomas ; Stubbs, >Andrew >Subject: Re: [Patch][gcn, nvptx,

[PATCH] nvptx: Support floating point reciprocal instructions.

The following patch addds support for PTX's rcp.rn.f32 and rcp.rn.f64 instructions. Note that the "rcp.rn" forms of this instruction calculate the fully IEEE compliant result for the reciprocal, unlike the rcp.approx variants that just provide fast approximations. I'm undecided as to whether to

PING [PATCH] x86-64: Define ASM_OUTPUT_ALIGNED_DECL_LOCAL

On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 2:02 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > Define ASM_OUTPUT_ALIGNED_DECL_LOCAL for large local common symbol. > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > * config/i386/x86-64.h (ASM_OUTPUT_ALIGNED_DECL_LOCAL): New. > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > > * gcc.target/i386/pr95620.c: New test. PING:

Re: [PATCH] x86: Require Linux target for PR target/93492 tests

Hi H.J., > Since -fpatchable-function-entry is only supported on Linux and used by > Linux kernel, require Linux target for PR target/93492 tests. > > PR target/93492 > * gcc.target/i386/pr93492-1.c: Require Linux target. > * gcc.target/i386/pr93492-2.c: Likewise. > * gcc.t