Re: [PATCH 2/2] Make option mvzeroupper independent of optimization level.

2023-06-26 Thread Uros Bizjak via Gcc-patches
On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 8:09 AM Hongtao Liu wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 2:05 PM Uros Bizjak wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 7:55 AM liuhongt wrote: > > > > > > pass_insert_vzeroupper is under condition > > > > > > TARGET_AVX && TARGET_VZEROUPPER > > > && flag_expensive_optimization

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Make option mvzeroupper independent of optimization level.

2023-06-26 Thread Hongtao Liu via Gcc-patches
On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 2:05 PM Uros Bizjak wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 7:55 AM liuhongt wrote: > > > > pass_insert_vzeroupper is under condition > > > > TARGET_AVX && TARGET_VZEROUPPER > > && flag_expensive_optimizations && !optimize_size > > > > But the document of mvzeroupper doesn't me

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Make option mvzeroupper independent of optimization level.

2023-06-26 Thread Uros Bizjak via Gcc-patches
On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 7:55 AM liuhongt wrote: > > pass_insert_vzeroupper is under condition > > TARGET_AVX && TARGET_VZEROUPPER > && flag_expensive_optimizations && !optimize_size > > But the document of mvzeroupper doesn't mention the insertion > required -O2 and above, it may confuse users whe

[PATCH 2/2] Make option mvzeroupper independent of optimization level.

2023-06-26 Thread liuhongt via Gcc-patches
pass_insert_vzeroupper is under condition TARGET_AVX && TARGET_VZEROUPPER && flag_expensive_optimizations && !optimize_size But the document of mvzeroupper doesn't mention the insertion required -O2 and above, it may confuse users when they explicitly use -Os -mvzeroupper. mvzeroupp