On 4/9/20 2:52 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Thu, Apr 02, 2020 at 11:53:47AM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
>> The rtl description of signed/unsigned overflow from subtract
>> was fine, as far as it goes -- we have CC_Cmode and CC_Vmode
>> that indicate that only those particular bit
Hi!
On Thu, Apr 02, 2020 at 11:53:47AM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> The rtl description of signed/unsigned overflow from subtract
> was fine, as far as it goes -- we have CC_Cmode and CC_Vmode
> that indicate that only those particular bits are valid.
>
> However, it's not clear how to exten
The rtl description of signed/unsigned overflow from subtract
was fine, as far as it goes -- we have CC_Cmode and CC_Vmode
that indicate that only those particular bits are valid.
However, it's not clear how to extend that description to
handle signed comparison, where N == V (GE) N != V (LT) are
