On 10/30/23 01:25, Fei Gao wrote:
diff --git a/gcc/ifcvt.cc b/gcc/ifcvt.cc
index 6e341fc4d4b..cfa9bc4b850 100644
--- a/gcc/ifcvt.cc
+++ b/gcc/ifcvt.cc
@@ -2911,7 +2911,7 @@ noce_try_sign_mask (struct noce_if_info *if_info)
static bool
noce_cond_zero_binary_op_supported (enum rtx_code op)
{
- if (op == PLUS || op == MINUS || op == IOR || op == XOR)
+ if (op == PLUS || op == MINUS || op == IOR || op == XOR || op == AND)
return true;
Include ASHIFT, LSHIFTRT, ASHIFTRT, ROTATE, ROTATERT. That should pick
up that critical conditional-shift-by-6 in leela.
+ if (opcode == AND)
+ {
+ tmp
+ = expand_simple_binop (mode, AND, common, z, NULL_RTX, 0, OPTAB_DIRECT);
OPTAB_WIDEN here I think.
+ if (!tmp)
+ {
+ end_sequence ();
+ return FALSE;
+ }
- /* If we have x = c ? x + z : x, use a new reg to avoid modifying x */
- if (common && rtx_equal_p (common, if_info->x))
- target = gen_reg_rtx (mode);
- else
- target = if_info->x;
+ target = noce_emit_czero (if_info, czero_code, common, if_info->x);
+ if (!target)
+ {
+ end_sequence ();
+ return FALSE;
Please try to be consistent with upper/lower case. In your prior
patches you used lower case for true/false. In this patch you're using
upper case. Lower case seems to be the standard in that file, so use
lower case.
+ }
- target = noce_emit_czero (if_info, czero_code, z, target);
- if (!target)
- {
- end_sequence ();
- return false;
+ target = expand_simple_binop (mode, IOR, tmp, target, if_info->x, 0,
+ OPTAB_DIRECT);
}
+ else
+ {
+ /* If we have x = c ? x + z : x, use a new reg to avoid modifying x */
+ if (common && rtx_equal_p (common, if_info->x))
+ target = gen_reg_rtx (mode);
+ else
+ target = if_info->x;
As noted before you may not be able to generate a new register when
ifcvt is run after register allocation. Your code needs to handle that
correctly.
+
+ target = noce_emit_czero (if_info, czero_code, z, target);
+ if (!target)
+ {
+ end_sequence ();
+ return false;
+ }
- target = expand_simple_binop (mode, opcode, common, target, if_info->x, 0,
- OPTAB_DIRECT);
+ target = expand_simple_binop (mode, opcode, common, target, if_info->x,
0,
+ OPTAB_DIRECT);
OPTAB_WIDEN.
And the usual comments about avoiding explicit registers in the tests.
I would suggest you try to handle this case as well, I don't think it's
handled by your current code:
long
eq2 (long a, long b)
{
if (a == 0)
return b;
return 0;
}
There's probably also a negated version of that to be handled as well.
Overall I think we can go forward with your patches after things are
fixed. I'm inclined to wait until after Maciej has integrated his
changes before actually committing them. While I don't expect problems,
I wouldn't want Maciej to have to respin a 40+ patch series.
Note that while we transition to stage3 development today, your patch
was posted while we were in stage1, so you've met the deadline. We just
need to get the updates done relatively soon rather than having it drag
late into stage3.
Jeff