From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id DBD303858410; Thu, 20 Jul 2023 22:03:22 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org DBD303858410 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1689890602; bh=3rN6sSvatXaoRLORuSlxg5N+l9fMYsSul0FKPoQFUyc=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=GYy6EiWmes9l1TsqV2gHTf9D9gp/AvORAI1YXlzu0gEUXz+UYEJqHgzsEiaZPDEa5 wtZb/Cmy1zobTUvIwner3anRke7TuYGozxHIaImHsh+Sz7beAxF5MYFUpUYT18i4pT BNZvslQoYbI+aE6VcxcogEM7CbiKvBOmn7xVtMuc= From: "juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/110751] RISC-V: Suport undefined value that allows VSETVL PASS use TA/MA Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 22:03:22 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: target X-Bugzilla-Version: 14.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D110751 --- Comment #15 from JuzheZhong --- I am wondering: do we have have other situations need "undef" value to do optimizations? If yes, I am aggree with Richard that we need to support "un= def" value. But "undef" value in Gimple IR support would be a long term work si= nce it is not an easy job. For example, in llvm, undef + a -> undef, but undef & a= -> 0.=