From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id AD677385B512; Fri, 18 Aug 2023 06:14:32 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org AD677385B512
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1692339272;
	bh=trwcHShUyqjkVt5Aw7tAw/Qv8BKrFBS4F6jrFSwm2L8=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=NpjYq/nK4h94WWRPL5v1f+nWJRUfkOSpikQdEoIVfuDQZ0Kr4O4xDihjUib9BM+eP
	 C5U550L22+2N7xcqMJb/swq+2X6GYbhSh5vce6q0cyU/YE7Po2UbD6hKASJo6lj33b
	 1hAKYkbM2IpiXjET8j20QP8WIVdOGPR9eTtj1UGc=
From: "sjames at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/93176] PPC: inefficient 64-bit constant consecutive ones
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2023 06:14:32 +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: 8.3.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: guojiufu at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc
Message-ID: <bug-93176-4-JDFYNCsuxy@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-93176-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-93176-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D93176

Sam James <sjames at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |sjames at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #11 from Sam James <sjames at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jens Seifert from comment #10)
> Looks like no patch in the area got delivered. I did a small test for=20
>=20

Peter's was at
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/838b2e97-dfa9-3ca0-c3c6-1767d60ddf=
05@linux.ibm.com/,
Alan's may be
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-September/553927.html.=