On 2022-03-02 07:25, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
Regstrapped on x86_64-linux-gnu, also tested on various riscv and arm
targets (with gcc-11). Ok to install?
Yes.
Thank you on working this, Alex.
for gcc/ChangeLog
* lra-constraints.cc (undo_optional_reloads): Recognize and
drop
On Mar 1, 2022, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Feb 23, 2022, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Feb 21, 2022, Richard Biener wrote:
Ok to revert commit r12-5852-g50e8b0c9bca6cdc57804f860ec5311b641753fbb
>>> OK. Please re-open the bug as appropriate.
>> Thanks. I've reopened it. Here's what I'
On Feb 23, 2022, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Feb 21, 2022, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> Ok to revert commit r12-5852-g50e8b0c9bca6cdc57804f860ec5311b641753fbb
>> OK. Please re-open the bug as appropriate.
> Thanks. I've reopened it. Here's what I'm installing. I'm not
> reverting the testcase
On Feb 21, 2022, Richard Biener wrote:
>> Ok to revert commit r12-5852-g50e8b0c9bca6cdc57804f860ec5311b641753fbb
> OK. Please re-open the bug as appropriate.
Thanks. I've reopened it. Here's what I'm installing. I'm not
reverting the testcase, since it stopped failing even before the patch
On Sat, Feb 19, 2022 at 12:28 AM Alexandre Oliva via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> On Dec 15, 2021, Jeff Law wrote:
>
> >> * expr.c (emit_move_complex_parts): Skip clobbers during lra.
> > OK for the next cycle.
>
> Thanks, but having looked into PR 104121, I withdraw this patch and also
> the already-i
On Dec 15, 2021, Jeff Law wrote:
>> * expr.c (emit_move_complex_parts): Skip clobbers during lra.
> OK for the next cycle.
Thanks, but having looked into PR 104121, I withdraw this patch and also
the already-installed patch for PR 103302. As I found out, LRA does
worse without the clobbers for
On 12/15/2021 1:22 AM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Dec 9, 2021, Jeff Law wrote:
I found a similar pattern of issuing clobbers for multi-word moves, but
not when reload_in_progress, in expr.c:emit_move_complex_parts. I don't
have a testcase, but I'm tempted to propose '!lra_in_progress &&' f
On Dec 9, 2021, Jeff Law wrote:
>> I found a similar pattern of issuing clobbers for multi-word moves, but
>> not when reload_in_progress, in expr.c:emit_move_complex_parts. I don't
>> have a testcase, but I'm tempted to propose '!lra_in_progress &&' for it
>> as well. Can you think of any rea
On 12/8/2021 9:08 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Dec 8, 2021, Jeff Law wrote:
expr.c (emit_move_multi_word): Skip clobber during lra.
OK.
I found a similar pattern of issuing clobbers for multi-word moves, but
not when reload_in_progress, in expr.c:emit_move_complex_parts. I don't
have a
On Dec 8, 2021, Jeff Law wrote:
>> expr.c (emit_move_multi_word): Skip clobber during lra.
> OK.
I found a similar pattern of issuing clobbers for multi-word moves, but
not when reload_in_progress, in expr.c:emit_move_complex_parts. I don't
have a testcase, but I'm tempted to propose '!lra_in
I'm installing momentarily.
[PR103302] skip multi-word pre-move clobber during lra
If we emit clobbers before multi-word moves during lra, we get
confused if a copy ends up with input or output replaced with each
other: the clobber then kills the previous set, and it gets deleted.
This patch av
On 12/7/2021 10:37 PM, Alexandre Oliva via Gcc-patches wrote:
If we emit clobbers before multi-word moves during lra, we get
confused if a copy ends up with input or output replaced with each
other: the clobber then kills the previous set, and it gets deleted.
This patch avoids emitting such
If we emit clobbers before multi-word moves during lra, we get
confused if a copy ends up with input or output replaced with each
other: the clobber then kills the previous set, and it gets deleted.
This patch avoids emitting such clobbers when lra_in_progress.
Regstrapped on x86_64-linux-gnu.
13 matches
Mail list logo
