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 2CB783937424; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:05:17 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 2CB783937424
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
 s=default; t=1583928317;
 bh=BD2/0kzVHqkXwzjcdSui5GE/6GKHCtuZSRmWU3lYHtQ=;
 h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
 b=i/ahq4AsB2N2/sb4h5Nmny+mDJ0Njr8MuEZDxAyJ8ywKCOPePxYDfizXJ9dRvepLl
 9XCMkmQDpkeFditejTBH2kUNUiglAY2iyPp2jgrExjn7ZNsHqm4yB9V69CNjLjq3PU
 08oSe2T3nRHQpbkWqk88MGaReg1oYnrHkkZwHP20=
From: "marxin at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/93709] [10 regression] fortran.dg/minlocval_4.f90 fails
 on power 9 after r10-4161
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:05:16 +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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc
Message-ID: <bug-93709-4-Nf6OJpbm3b@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-93709-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-93709-4@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
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 12:05:17 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D93709

Martin Li=C5=A1ka <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

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

--- Comment #6 from Martin Li=C5=A1ka <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
commit r10-7114-g37e0df8a9be5a8232f4ccb73cdadb02121ba523f
Author: Jiufu Guo <guojiufu@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Tue Mar 10 13:51:57 2020 +0800

    rs6000: Check -+0 and NaN for smax/smin generation

    PR93709 mentioned regressions on maxlocval_4.f90 and minlocval_f.f90 wh=
ich
    relates to max of '-inf' and 'nan'. This regression occur on P9 because
    P9 new instruction 'xsmaxcdp' is generated.
    And for C code `a < b ? b : a` is also generated as `xsmaxcdp` under -O2
    for P9. While this instruction behavior more like C/C++ semantic (a>b?a=
:b).

    This generates prevents 'xsmaxcdp' to be generated for those cases.
    'xsmincdp' also is handled in patch.

    gcc/
    2020-03-10  Jiufu Guo  <guojiufu@linux.ibm.com>

            PR target/93709
            * gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_emit_p9_fp_minmax): Check
            NAN and SIGNED_ZEROR for smax/smin.

    gcc/testsuite
    2020-03-10  Jiufu Guo  <guojiufu@linux.ibm.com>

            PR target/93709
            * gcc.target/powerpc/p9-minmax-3.c: New test.=