On 05/17/2017 12:33 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 4:45 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
>
>>> But yes, we definitely should document the final canonical ordering.
>>
>> Is that about to also happen?
>>
>> I foresee in another half-a-dozen years, and *this* iteration is
>> forgotte
On Wed, 17 May 2017, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 4:45 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> >> But yes, we definitely should document the final canonical ordering.
> >
> > Is that about to also happen?
> The proposed doc patch is wiating for review at [1].
>
> [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/ml
> I've got the visium, rx and mn103 patches handy to ensure they don't
> regress. aarch64 doesn't seem to be affected either way but I didn't
> investigate why -- I expected it to improve with your change.
Thanks for taking care of this, but a couple of comments in config/visium are
now backward
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 4:45 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
>> But yes, we definitely should document the final canonical ordering.
>
> Is that about to also happen?
>
> I foresee in another half-a-dozen years, and *this* iteration is
> forgotten, someone bothered enough to argue eloquently coming
On Fri, 12 May 2017, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 05/11/2017 03:29 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > The canonical order of insns affecting condition-codes has been
> > discussed in the past too.
> >
> > I was then arguing that the compare should go last, i.e.
> > (parallel [(set (reg) (op...))
> >
On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 2:47 PM, Markus Trippelsdorf
wrote:
>> 2017-05-12 Uros Bizjak
>>
>> * compare-elim.c (try_eliminate_compare): Canonicalize
>> operation with embedded compare to
>> [(set (reg:CCM) (compare:CCM (operation) (immediate)))
>> (set (reg) (operation)].
>>
>>
On 2017.05.12 at 21:09 +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 8:34 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> > On 05/10/2017 01:05 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Tue,
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 9:09 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 8:34 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 05/10/2017 01:05 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Tue, Ma
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 8:34 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 05/10/2017 01:05 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 06:06:47PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>
>
On 05/10/2017 01:05 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 06:06:47PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
Attached patch enables post-reload compare elimination pass by
providing expected
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 05:42:59AM -0400, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> (To-list pruned, my correction doesn't need attention.)
>
> On Thu, 11 May 2017, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > On Wed, 10 May 2017, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 09:57:56PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> >
(To-list pruned, my correction doesn't need attention.)
On Thu, 11 May 2017, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> On Wed, 10 May 2017, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> > On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 09:57:56PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > > BTW: This patch now catches 417 cases (instead of 200+) in linux
> > > build,
On 05/11/2017 12:46 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 8:28 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
Attached patch changes compare-elim.c order to what i386.md expects.
Thoughts?
Haven't looked at the patch itself. But I do have the necessary bits to
convert the mn103 port. It was slightly more t
On 05/11/2017 03:29 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
On Wed, 10 May 2017, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 09:57:56PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
BTW: This patch now catches 417 cases (instead of 200+) in linux
build, including e.g.:
(parallel [
(set (reg:CCZ 17 flags)
On Wed, 10 May 2017, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 09:57:56PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > BTW: This patch now catches 417 cases (instead of 200+) in linux
> > build, including e.g.:
> >
> > (parallel [
> > (set (reg:CCZ 17 flags)
> > (compare:CCZ (lshiftrt:SI
On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 8:28 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>> Attached patch changes compare-elim.c order to what i386.md expects.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
> Haven't looked at the patch itself. But I do have the necessary bits to
> convert the mn103 port. It was slightly more than just fixing the md file,
> but
On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 12:28:56PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 05/10/2017 01:05 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > > > On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 06:06:47PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > > > >
On 05/10/2017 01:05 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 06:06:47PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
Attached patch enables post-reload compare elimination pass by
providing expected
On 05/10/2017 02:27 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 09:57:56PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
BTW: This patch now catches 417 cases (instead of 200+) in linux
build, including e.g.:
(parallel [
(set (reg:CCZ 17 flags)
(compare:CCZ (lshiftrt:SI (reg:SI 4 si [ori
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 09:57:56PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> BTW: This patch now catches 417 cases (instead of 200+) in linux
> build, including e.g.:
>
> (parallel [
> (set (reg:CCZ 17 flags)
> (compare:CCZ (lshiftrt:SI (reg:SI 4 si [orig:93 _10 ] [93])
>
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 9:05 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 06:06:47PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
Attached patch enables post-reload compare elimination pass by
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 06:06:47PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>> Attached patch enables post-reload compare elimination pass by
>>> providing expected patterns (duplicates of existing pa
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 06:06:47PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>> Attached patch enables post-reload compare elimination pass by
>> providing expected patterns (duplicates of existing patterns with
>> setters of reg and flags switched in the pa
On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 06:06:47PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> Attached patch enables post-reload compare elimination pass by
> providing expected patterns (duplicates of existing patterns with
> setters of reg and flags switched in the parallel) for flag setting
> arithmetic instructions.
>
> The
Hello!
Attached patch enables post-reload compare elimination pass by
providing expected patterns (duplicates of existing patterns with
setters of reg and flags switched in the parallel) for flag setting
arithmetic instructions.
The merge triggers more than 3000 times during the gcc bootstrap,
mo
25 matches
Mail list logo
