still there are a lot of things that
show you
how to work with isl ast and may considerably help you.
Mircea
- Original Message -
> From: "Roman Gareev"
> To: "Mircea Namolaru" , "Tobias Grosser"
>
> Cc: "Albert Cohen" , gcc@gcc.gn
time)
Mircea
- Original Message -
> From: "Tobias Grosser"
> To: "Mircea Namolaru" , "Roman Gareev"
>
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, "Albert Cohen"
> Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 2:11:49 PM
> Subject: Re: Integration of ISL code g
essage -
> From: "Tobias Grosser"
> To: "Roman Gareev"
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, "Albert Cohen" , "Mircea
> Namolaru"
> Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 12:51:26 PM
> Subject: Re: Integration of ISL code generator into Graphite
>
> On 03/21/2
the ISL AST (with
possible addition of
new attributes/transformations) ?
Regards, Mircea
- Original Message -
> From: "Roman Gareev"
> To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: "Tobias Grosser" , "Albert Cohen"
> , "Mircea Namolaru"
>
> Sent: F
> As for C++, I think we need more OO language specific
> optimizations. I don't know what the status of
> devirtualizion which was reported on the previous
> summit.
Sorry for the late replay.
The devirtualization is on hold. Currently GCC is lacking the necessary
infrastructure needed by C
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Kenner) wrote on 17/01/2007 18:04:20:
> > First, it seems to me that in your case:
> >
> > (1) a = a | 1 /* a |= 1 */
> > (2) a = a | 1 /* a |= 1 */
> >
> > the expressions "a | 1" in (1) and (2) are different as the "a"
> > is not the same. So there is nothing to do f
> Thanks. Another question I have is that, in this case, will the
following
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Sign_Extension_Removal
>
> help in removal of the sign / zero extension ?
First, it seems to me that in your case:
(1) a = a | 1 /* a |= 1 */
(2) a = a | 1 /* a |= 1 */
the expressions "a | 1
> Thanks. Another question I have is that, in this case, will the
following
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Sign_Extension_Removal
>
> help in removal of the sign / zero extension ?
First, it seems to me that in your case:
(1) a = a | 1 /* a |= 1 */
(2) a = a | 1 /* a |= 1 */
the expressions "a | 1
> @item -fsee
> @opindex fsee
> Eliminates redundant extension instructions and move the non redundant
> ones to optimal placement using LCM.
> Enabled at level @option{-O3}.
>
> Would you mind adjusting this as well
Thanks. I've updated doc/invoke.texi correspondingly. Mircea
Committed according to
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-05/msg00185.html
Mircea
2006-05-07 Mircea Namolaru <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* opts.c (flag_see): remove its setting at -O3.
Index: opts.c
===
--- opts.c (re
> Given that this is more than a bootstrap problem with non-default flags,
> but testsuite regressions for gfortran and SPEC failures on a primary
> platform, I think this falls under GCC's 48 hour rule. This simply
> formalizes your phrase "short time frame" above, and means that it
you're
> unl
> That certainly does suggest a bug in the SEE patches. They needn't do
> anything useful on IA32/AMD64, but they should presumably either (a) not
> cause a bootstrap failure on these architectures, or (b) be disabled on
> these architectures.
Agree. I will check the bootstrapping on x86. (a) see
The patches for SEE have been committed today.
The minor style corrections requested by you in the
final review approval will be in a follow-up patch
to be submitted the next week.
Mircea
13 matches
Mail list logo
