I found a way to improve the function find_bswap/find_bswap_or_nop
and reduce its size. Please hold for the review, I will post an updated
version as soon as I finish testing.
Best regards,
Thomas Preud'homme
Please find attached the new version of this patch addressing all your comments.
ChangeLog are now as follows:
*** gcc/ChangeLog ***
2014-05-04 Thomas Preud'homme
PR tree-optimization/54733
* expr.c (get_inner_reference): Add a parameter to control whether a
MEM_REF s
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 3:34 AM, Thomas Preud'homme
wrote:
> See updated part 2 of the patch in attachment. Part 1 is unchanged. New
> ChangeLog are as follows:
>
> *** gcc/ChangeLog ***
>
> 2014-04-23 Thomas Preud'homme
>
> PR tree-optimization/54733
> * tree-ssa-math-opts.c (
>
> Bootstrapped on x86_64-linux-gnu with no testsuite regression. Also did a
> arm-none-eabi cross build with no regression after running testsuite via
> qemu
Forgot to ask if it's ok for trunk. Same question for part 1 and 3.
Best regards,
Thomas
See updated part 2 of the patch in attachment. Part 1 is unchanged. New
ChangeLog are as follows:
*** gcc/ChangeLog ***
2014-04-23 Thomas Preud'homme
PR tree-optimization/54733
* tree-ssa-math-opts.c (find_bswap_load): New.
(find_bswap_1): Add support for memory sourc
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 7:19 AM, Thomas Preud'homme
wrote:
>> From: Richard Biener [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
>>
>> With handling only the outermost handled-component and then only a
>> selected subset you'll catch many but not all cases. Why not simply
>> use get_inner_reference () here
> From: Richard Biener [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
>
> With handling only the outermost handled-component and then only a
> selected subset you'll catch many but not all cases. Why not simply
> use get_inner_reference () here (plus stripping the constant offset
> from an innermost MEM_REF
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Thomas Preud'homme
wrote:
>> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
>> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Rainer Orth
>>
>> Just omit the { target *-*-* } completely, also a few more times.
>
> Please find attached an updated patch.
@@ -1733,6 +1743,
> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Rainer Orth
>
> Just omit the { target *-*-* } completely, also a few more times.
Please find attached an updated patch.
Best regards,
Thomas
gcc32rm-84.3.2.part2.diff
Description: Binary data
> From: Richard Biener [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
>
> "More like" isn't enough to answer this - do you have a testcase? (usually
> these end up in undefined-overflow and/or conversion-to-sizetype issues)
I do. See attachment. This testcase needs to be compiled with patch 2/3
applied. As
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 9:04 AM, Thomas Preud'homme
wrote:
>> From: Marc Glisse [mailto:marc.gli...@inria.fr]
>>
>> Uh? It does fold a+1-a for me. What it doesn't do is look through the
>> definition of b in b-a. Richard+GSoC will supposedly soon provide a
>> function that does that.
>
> Oh right,
> From: Marc Glisse [mailto:marc.gli...@inria.fr]
>
> Uh? It does fold a+1-a for me. What it doesn't do is look through the
> definition of b in b-a. Richard+GSoC will supposedly soon provide a
> function that does that.
Oh right, it's a bit more complex here since the array index is converted
to
On Wed, 2 Apr 2014, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
Note that as it stands the patch does not work for arrays indexed with
variable (such a tab[a] || (tab[a+1] << 8)) because fold_const does not
fold (a + 1) - a.
Uh? It does fold a+1-a for me. What it doesn't do is look through the
definition of b
Here is the second patch in the series. Its purpose is to extend the current
bswap
optimization to handle bitwise operations on memory sources (array and
structures). This patch extends the concept of symbolic number used in the
bswap pass to memorize some extra informations for bitwise operations
14 matches
Mail list logo
