From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 114836 invoked by alias); 28 Jan 2016 12:47:12 -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 114778 invoked by uid 89); 28 Jan 2016 12:47:07 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mail-qg0-f44.google.com Received: from mail-qg0-f44.google.com (HELO mail-qg0-f44.google.com) (209.85.192.44) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 12:47:06 +0000 Received: by mail-qg0-f44.google.com with SMTP id e32so36187944qgf.3 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 04:47:06 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=ZwOdOZDL/ZESIgXTBX5tgnF7OyFysWQKZ+vjDzP6BF4=; b=ld8ScNfY5hZZDsyxwj+0etugUGhG6/Ybv1wYlHwO+cubh2RGlUfL7FLBhoX6W32sIO r5x7CKl9zXgIhIsO/iAsqQwqj3GanLZlqaFcDC9apzo6HBUnQMYnDS90DOQsL5m7f0p6 17BJaDFLxBCFVHDtihIHyvT5nIzymVJ+4DSLjOYkqs6WLgMRexaG5cmmKtYmDVRiIVtR ldkMD3F+0N0JMTVvWha9pUA6oUNlWKJrt31THdvwTnHaRSs0q/NcfzA2b19MdOXRVexm aff8dpTaHtBCZoy2kFoognrFavmO6DyqelBUThugO3X/xjQwpoAU1rTV3r5dMQQHw7/0 JTVg== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOR4aimUnnaSkgm2zqDOUXL3b0mNuiD407ZtntlkKs8g5cXwOJlZ/JiVm9l0WvTr8D9FsD8BDydjLiCA2Q== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.55.80.131 with SMTP id e125mr3192725qkb.62.1453985224454; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 04:47:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.55.4.210 with HTTP; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 04:47:04 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20160127174509.GB25193@redhat.com> References: <20160113152650.GJ25528@redhat.com> <20160113195616.GL25528@redhat.com> <20160120113151.GY25528@redhat.com> <20160127072601.GP25528@redhat.com> <56A8F82C.1050903@redhat.com> <20160127174509.GB25193@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 12:47:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [C/C++ PATCH] Don't emit invalid VEC_COND_EXPR for vector comparisons (PR c/68062) From: "H.J. Lu" To: Marek Polacek Cc: Jeff Law , Jason Merrill , GCC Patches Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-01/txt/msg02207.txt.bz2 On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: > On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 10:02:36AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote: >> On 01/27/2016 12:26 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: >> >Ping. >> > >> >On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 12:31:51PM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote: >> >>On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 11:11:52PM +0000, Joseph Myers wrote: >> >>>The C front-end changes are OK. >> >> >> >>Jason, is the C++ part of this patch here >> >> >> >>(which is identical to the change in the C FE) ok? >> >> >> >>Also, not sure about backporting this, maybe just to 5? >> I'll go ahead and ack the C++ bits. This is fine for the trunk. > > Thanks. > >> WRT backporting, your call. > > I think I'll put it into GCC 5 (it's safe and should apply cleanly), > but leave 4.9 alone. > > Marek I got FAIL: c-c++-common/vector-compare-4.c -Wc++-compat (test for warnings, line 17) FAIL: c-c++-common/vector-compare-4.c -Wc++-compat (test for warnings, line 18) FAIL: c-c++-common/vector-compare-4.c -Wc++-compat (test for warnings, line 34) FAIL: c-c++-common/vector-compare-4.c -Wc++-compat (test for warnings, line 35) on x86 on GCC 5 branch. -- H.J.