Hi Prathamesh,
Could you split out the ARM specific portions into a separate patch
please in a patch series?
>@deftypefn {Target Hook} void TARGET_EXPAND_DIVMOD_LIBFUNC (bool
>@var{unsignedp}, machine_mode @var{mode}, @var{rtx}, @var{rtx}, rtx
>*@var{quot}, rtx *@var{rem})
>Expand divmod libfun
On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 12:09 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> I wonder if rather than introducing a target hook ports could use
> a define_expand expanding to a libcall for this case?
Of the two divmod libcall APIs, one requires a stack temporary, which
would be awkward to allocate in a define_expand
On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 8:43 PM, Jim Wilson wrote:
>> Are we certain that the libcall is a win for any target?
>> I would have expected a default of
>> q = x / y
>> r = x - (q * y)
>> to be most efficient on modern machines. Even more so on targets like ARM
>> that have multiply-a
On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 2:15 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 01/29/2016 12:37 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>>
>>> To workaround this, I defined a new hook expand_divmod_libfunc, which
>>> targets must override for expanding call to target-specific dimovd.
>>> The "default" hook default_expand_divm
On 01/29/2016 12:37 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
To workaround this, I defined a new hook expand_divmod_libfunc, which
targets must override for expanding call to target-specific dimovd.
The "default" hook default_expand_divmod_libfunc() expands call to
libgcc2.c:__udivmoddi4() since that's the only
On Thu, 28 Jan 2016, Jim Wilson wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 5:37 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> To workaround this, I defined a new hook expand_divmod_libfunc, which
> >> targets must override for expanding call to target-specific dimovd.
> >> The "default" hook default_expand_divmod_libfunc
On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 5:37 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>> To workaround this, I defined a new hook expand_divmod_libfunc, which
>> targets must override for expanding call to target-specific dimovd.
>> The "default" hook default_expand_divmod_libfunc() expands call to
>> libgcc2.c:__udivmoddi4() s
On Wed, 27 Jan 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> On 11 November 2015 at 19:04, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Wed, 11 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> >
> >> On 11 November 2015 at 16:03, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> > On Wed, 11 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On 10 Novem
On 11 November 2015 at 19:04, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
>> On 11 November 2015 at 16:03, Richard Biener wrote:
>> > On Wed, 11 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 10 November 2015 at 20:11, Richard Biener wrote:
>> >> > On Mon, 9 Nov
On Wed, 11 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> On 11 November 2015 at 16:03, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Wed, 11 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> >
> >> On 10 November 2015 at 20:11, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> > On Mon, 9 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On 4 Novembe
On 11 November 2015 at 16:03, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
>> On 10 November 2015 at 20:11, Richard Biener wrote:
>> > On Mon, 9 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 4 November 2015 at 20:35, Richard Biener wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > Btw, di
On Wed, 11 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> On 10 November 2015 at 20:11, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Mon, 9 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> >
> >> On 4 November 2015 at 20:35, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Btw, did you investigate code gen differences on x86_64/i586? That
>
On 10 November 2015 at 20:11, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
>> On 4 November 2015 at 20:35, Richard Biener wrote:
>> >
>> > Btw, did you investigate code gen differences on x86_64/i586? That
>> > target expands all divisions/modulo ops via divmod, relyi
Richard Biener writes:
> On Mon, 9 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>> c) Gating the divmod transform -
>> I tried gating it on checks for optab_handlers on div and mod, however
>> this doesn't enable transform for arm cortex-a9
>> anymore (cortex-a9 doesn't have hardware instructions for inte
On Mon, 9 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> On 4 November 2015 at 20:35, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > Btw, did you investigate code gen differences on x86_64/i586? That
> > target expands all divisions/modulo ops via divmod, relying on CSE
> > solely as the HW always computes both div and
On 4 November 2015 at 20:35, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
>> On 2 November 2015 at 18:31, Richard Biener wrote:
>> > On Mon, 2 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 2 November 2015 at 13:20, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > On 30 O
On Wed, 4 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> On 2 November 2015 at 18:31, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Mon, 2 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> >
> >> On 2 November 2015 at 13:20, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> >> wrote:
> >> > On 30 October 2015 at 15:57, Richard Biener
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
On 2 November 2015 at 18:31, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
>> On 2 November 2015 at 13:20, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>> wrote:
>> > On 30 October 2015 at 15:57, Richard Biener
>> > wrote:
>> >> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 8:39 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>> >> wrot
On Mon, 2 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> On 2 November 2015 at 13:20, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
> > On 30 October 2015 at 15:57, Richard Biener
> > wrote:
> >> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 8:39 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> >> wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>> I have attached revamped version of Kugan'
On 2 November 2015 at 13:20, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
> On 30 October 2015 at 15:57, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 8:39 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> I have attached revamped version of Kugan's patch
>>> (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2013-06/msg00100.html) f
On 30 October 2015 at 15:57, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 8:39 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I have attached revamped version of Kugan's patch
>> (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2013-06/msg00100.html) for PR43721.
>> Test-case: http://pastebin.com/QMfpXLD9
>> divmod pa
On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 8:39 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
> Hi,
> I have attached revamped version of Kugan's patch
> (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2013-06/msg00100.html) for PR43721.
> Test-case: http://pastebin.com/QMfpXLD9
> divmod pass dump: http://pastebin.com/yMY1ikCp
> Assembly: http://past
Hi,
I have attached revamped version of Kugan's patch
(https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2013-06/msg00100.html) for PR43721.
Test-case: http://pastebin.com/QMfpXLD9
divmod pass dump: http://pastebin.com/yMY1ikCp
Assembly: http://pastebin.com/kk2HZpvA
The approach I took is similar to sincos pass, which i
23 matches
Mail list logo