On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 02:45:21PM +0530, Virendra Pathak wrote:
> Hi gcc-patches group,
>
> Please find the patch for adding rtx_costs routine for vulcan cpu.
>
> Tested with compiling cross aarch64-linux-gcc , bootstrapped native
> aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu
> and make check (gcc). No new regression failure is added by this patch.
>
> Kindly review and merge the patch to trunk, if the patch is okay.
> Thanks.
This is OK, but I have the same question for you as I had for the
qdf24xx tuning that Jim proposed, so I won't commit it yet...
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> Virendra Pathak <virendra.pat...@broadcom.com>
>
> * config/aarch64/aarch64-cores.def: Update vulcan COSTS.
> * config/aarch64/aarch64-cost-tables.h
> (vulcan_extra_costs): New variable.
> * config/aarch64/aarch64.c
> (vulcan_addrcost_table): Likewise.
> (vulcan_regmove_cost): Likewise.
> (vulcan_vector_cost): Likewise.
> (vulcan_branch_cost): Likewise.
> (vulcan_tunings): Likewise.
>
> + {
> + /* FP SFmode */
> + {
> + COSTS_N_INSNS (16), /* Div. */
> + COSTS_N_INSNS (6), /* Mult. */
> + COSTS_N_INSNS (6), /* Mult_addsub. */
> + COSTS_N_INSNS (6), /* Fma. */
> + COSTS_N_INSNS (6), /* Addsub. */
> + COSTS_N_INSNS (5), /* Fpconst. */
> + COSTS_N_INSNS (5), /* Neg. */
> + COSTS_N_INSNS (5), /* Compare. */
> + COSTS_N_INSNS (7), /* Widen. */
> + COSTS_N_INSNS (7), /* Narrow. */
> + COSTS_N_INSNS (7), /* Toint. */
> + COSTS_N_INSNS (7), /* Fromint. */
> + COSTS_N_INSNS (7) /* Roundint. */
> + },
> + /* FP DFmode */
> + {
> + COSTS_N_INSNS (23), /* Div. */
> + COSTS_N_INSNS (6), /* Mult. */
> + COSTS_N_INSNS (6), /* Mult_addsub. */
> + COSTS_N_INSNS (6), /* Fma. */
> + COSTS_N_INSNS (6), /* Addsub. */
> + COSTS_N_INSNS (5), /* Fpconst. */
> + COSTS_N_INSNS (5), /* Neg. */
> + COSTS_N_INSNS (5), /* Compare. */
> + COSTS_N_INSNS (7), /* Widen. */
> + COSTS_N_INSNS (7), /* Narrow. */
> + COSTS_N_INSNS (7), /* Toint. */
> + COSTS_N_INSNS (7), /* Fromint. */
> + COSTS_N_INSNS (7) /* Roundint. */
> + }
Recently ( https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-06/msg00251.html ,
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-06/msg01418.html ), I changed the
Cortex-A57 and Cortex-A53 cost tables to make the cost of a floating-point
operation relative to the cost of a floating-point move. This gave some
code generation benefits, particularly around conditional execution and
generation of constants.
Did you see those patches, and did you consider whether there would be a
benefit to doing the same for Vulcan?
Thanks,
James
