On 03/08/15 14:37, Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 3:02 PM, Kyrill Tkachov <kyrylo.tkac...@arm.com> wrote:
On 03/08/15 13:33, Uros Bizjak wrote:
Hello!
2015-07-30 Kyrylo Tkachov <kyrylo.tkac...@arm.com>
* ifcvt.c (noce_try_store_flag_constants): Make logic of the case
when diff == STORE_FLAG_VALUE or diff == -STORE_FLAG_VALUE more
explicit. Prefer to add the flag whenever possible.
(noce_process_if_block): Try noce_try_store_flag_constants before
noce_try_cmove.
2015-07-30 Kyrylo Tkachov <kyrylo.tkac...@arm.com>
* gcc.target/aarch64/csel_bfx_1.c: New test.
* gcc.target/aarch64/csel_imms_inc_1.c: Likewise.
This patch regressed following tests on x86_64:
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/cmov2.c scan-assembler sbb
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/cmov3.c scan-assembler cmov[^3]
Sorry for that :(
I could have sworn they passed for me during my run...
While cmov3 case is questionable by itself in light of PR56309 [1],
the cnov2 case regressed from:
cmpl %edi, %esi
sbbl %eax, %eax
andl $-10, %eax
addl $5, %eax
ret
to:
xorl %eax, %eax
cmpl %esi, %edi
setbe %al
negl %eax
andl $10, %eax
subl $5, %eax
ret
Please note that sbb (aka {*x86_movsicc_0_m1} ) is not generated
anymore. Non-QImode setcc instructions are problematic on x86, since
they need to be zero-extended to their full length.
IMO, we can check if the target is able to generate insn that
implements conditional move between 0 and -1 for certain comparison
mode, like:
#(insn:TI 27 26 28 2 (parallel [
# (set (reg:SI 0 ax [orig:87 D.1845 ] [87])
# (if_then_else:SI (ltu:SI (reg:CC 17 flags)
# (const_int 0 [0]))
# (const_int -1 [0xffffffffffffffff])
# (const_int 0 [0])))
# (clobber (reg:CC 17 flags))
# ]) cmov2.c:9 947 {*x86_movsicc_0_m1}
# (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:CC 17 flags)
# (expr_list:REG_UNUSED (reg:CC 17 flags)
# (nil))))
sbbl %eax, %eax # 27 *x86_movsicc_0_m1 [length = 2]
this is the key insn, and as shown above, further asm sequence is
similar between patched and unpatched compiler.
Hmm yes.
We have a HAVE_conditional_move check, but that's not fine grained enough.
How about trying an emit_conditional_move and checking that the result is a
single insn?
Kyrill
Uros.
