From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 41353 invoked by alias); 21 Dec 2015 05:00:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 41337 invoked by uid 89); 21 Dec 2015 05:00:38 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=regressing, hello! X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 21 Dec 2015 05:00:38 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C73CC6A; Mon, 21 Dec 2015 05:00:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (ovpn-113-82.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.82]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id tBL50aKS022580; Mon, 21 Dec 2015 00:00:36 -0500 Subject: Re: [RFA][PATCH][PR tree-optimization/64910] x86 backend improvement To: Uros Bizjak , "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" References: From: Jeff Law Message-ID: <56778773.5030706@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 05:00:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-12/txt/msg01965.txt.bz2 On 12/19/2015 11:06 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: > Hello! > > + 2015-12-19 Jeff Law > + > + PR tree-optimization/64910 > + * config/i386/i386.md (testqi_ext_3): Allow HImode. > > OK for mainline and branch. Thanks. I double-checked and gcc-5 has not regressed, presumably there's an additional interaction that's causing this to only manifest on the trunk. Perhaps in combine or in the optabs bits that figure out the modes to use on these insns. Given gcc-5 isn't regressing, I didn't install the patch on the branch. Jeff