Hi Robert,

This fix on gcc-5-branch doesn't apply on Linaro 5 branch, because we have backported trunk revision 222624 (which renames maybe_fma to coumpound_p) into it. So, our branch as the same code as trunk one regarding aarch64_rtx_costs. Do you experiment any issues related to this change ?

Regards, Yvan

On 3 December 2015 at 11:37, Robert Schiele rschiele@gmail.com wrote:

Hi,

I found that with the merge

commit ac19ac6481a3f326d9f41403f5dadab548b2c8a6 Author: Yvan Roux yvan.roux@linaro.org Date: Wed Sep 16 10:57:42 2015 +0200

Merge branches/gcc-5-branch rev 227732.

Change-Id: I2f59904b28323b1c72a8cf1bd62c9e460d95bcea

the following branch that was within merge range on gcc-5-branch was lost on the linaro branch:

commit b45a5cf7c1544f95578e823e25402b58fb3fbedd Author: nsz nsz@138bc75d-0d04-0410-961f-82ee72b054a4 Date: Tue Aug 4 16:49:54 2015 +0000

Fix broken backport patch.

gcc:

    Backport from mainline:
    2015-08-04  Szabolcs Nagy  <szabolcs.nagy@arm.com>

    PR target/66731
    * config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64_rtx_costs): Fix NEG cost for FNMUL.
    (aarch64_rtx_mult_cost): Fix MULT cost with -frounding-math.



git-svn-id:

svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcc-5-branch@226588 138bc75d-0d04-0410-961f-82ee72b054a4

diff --git a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c index 691874b..eebc9c3 100644 --- a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c +++ b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c @@ -5250,7 +5250,7 @@ aarch64_rtx_mult_cost (rtx x, int code, int outer, bool speed) which case FNMUL is different than FMUL with operand negation. */ bool neg0 = GET_CODE (op0) == NEG; bool neg1 = GET_CODE (op1) == NEG;

•     if (compound_p || !flag_rounding_math || (neg0 && neg1))
  

•     if (maybe_fma || !flag_rounding_math || (neg0 && neg1))
        {
          if (neg0)
            op0 = XEXP (op0, 0);
  
  

Since this was a fix to the patch one commit ahead and also merged in the same operation and there is no further comment on why this fix was skipped, may I assume that this happened by accident and you probably want to fix that merge flaw by reapplying the missing patch? Or is there an information detail I don't have that requires this fix to be skipped on the Linaro branch?

Robert _______________________________________________ linaro-toolchain mailing list linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-toolchain