On 12/08/14 07:49, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 11:44 PM, Marat Zakirov wrote:
>> Hi Vladimir!
>>
>> I think you are as the main IRA contributor would be appropriate person to
>> answer question bellow. Please confirm or refute my statement about
>> unsplittable register ranges i
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 9:56 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 08/11/14 07:41, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>>
>>
>> I haven't been able to get combine to match the comparison+xor+neg+plus
>> RTL and it seems like it would be just a workaround to undo the
>> tree-level transformation.
>
> Yea, it'd just be a work
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 12:47 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 5:52 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 1:06 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 2:53 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>>> wrote:
On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Rich
On 12/08/14 10:39, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 9:56 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 08/11/14 07:41, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
I haven't been able to get combine to match the comparison+xor+neg+plus
RTL and it seems like it would be just a workaround to undo the
tree-level transformation
Got it. Thank you.
On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 11:07 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 08/08/14 06:18, Evgeniya Maenkova wrote:
>>
>> As far as I know, there are so many configurations (frontends x
>> backends x applications(benchmarks) x etc), that the same optimization
>> could improve performance in one con
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
The aarch64 target has a conditional negation instruction
CSNEG Rd, Rs1, Rs2, cond
with semantics Rd = if cond then Rs1 else -Rs2.
This, however doesn't get end up getting matched for code such as:
int
foo2 (unsigned a, unsigned b)
{
int r = 0;
r =
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>
> On 12/08/14 10:39, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 9:56 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>>>
>>> On 08/11/14 07:41, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
I haven't been able to get combine to match the comparison+xor+neg+plus
On 08/12/14 04:31, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 12/08/14 10:39, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 9:56 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 08/11/14 07:41, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
I haven't been able to get combine to match the comparison+xor+neg+plus
RTL and it seems like it would be just a workar
On 12/08/14 15:22, Jeff Law wrote:
On 08/12/14 04:31, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 12/08/14 10:39, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 9:56 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 08/11/14 07:41, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
I haven't been able to get combine to match the comparison+xor+neg+plus
RTL and it s
On 12/08/14 16:11, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 12/08/14 15:22, Jeff Law wrote:
On 08/12/14 04:31, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 12/08/14 10:39, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 9:56 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 08/11/14 07:41, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
I haven't been able to get combine to matc
On 08/12/2014 12:20 PM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
On 12/08/14 07:49, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 11:44 PM, Marat Zakirov wrote:
Hi Vladimir!
I think you are as the main IRA contributor would be appropriate person to
answer question bellow. Please confirm or refute my statement
On 12/08/14 16:16, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 12/08/14 16:11, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 12/08/14 15:22, Jeff Law wrote:
On 08/12/14 04:31, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 12/08/14 10:39, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 9:56 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 08/11/14 07:41, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 04:16:34PM +0100, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> >I managed to get combine to recognise this pattern:
> >(set (match_operand:GPI 0 "register_operand" "=r")
> > (plus:GPI (xor:GPI (neg:GPI (match_operand:GPI 1
> >"register_operand" "r"))
> > (mat
Dear all, I am conducting a survey about the use of exception handling
constructs in C++. I would really appreciate if you could contribute
to this research by answering a few questions on the subject.
The survey is available on-line:
https://pt.surveymonkey.com/s/exceptionHandling
All the best,
14 matches
Mail list logo
