1
> > and the corresponding tests.
> >
> > The new patch is attached.
>
> OK.
>
> Thanks,
> Richard.
>
> > Eugene
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Richard Biener
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 5, 2021 4:21 AM
> >
enfeld
Cc: gabrav...@gmail.com; ja...@gcc.gnu.org; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH][tree-optimization]Optimize combination of
comparisons to dec+compare
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 10:04 PM Eugene Rozenfeld
wrote:
>
> I got more feedback for the patch from Gabriel
Eugene Rozenfeld
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2020 3:01 PM
> > To: Richard Biener ;
> > gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> > Subject: RE: Optimize combination of comparisons to dec+compare
> >
> > Re-sending my question and re-attaching the patch.
> >
> > Rich
-Original Message-
From: Richard Biener
Sent: Tuesday, January 5, 2021 4:21 AM
To: Eugene Rozenfeld
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH][tree-optimization]Optimize combination of
comparisons to dec+compare
On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 9:50 PM Eugene Rozenfeld
wrote:
>
>
On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 9:50 PM Eugene Rozenfeld
wrote:
>
> Ping.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Eugene Rozenfeld
> Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2020 3:01 PM
> To: Richard Biener ; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: RE: Optimize combination of comparisons to dec+c
Ping.
-Original Message-
From: Eugene Rozenfeld
Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2020 3:01 PM
To: Richard Biener ; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: RE: Optimize combination of comparisons to dec+compare
Re-sending my question and re-attaching the patch.
Richard, can you please clarify your
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Optimize combination of comparisons to dec+compare
Richard,
> Do we already handle x < y || x <= CST to x <= y - CST?
That is an invalid transformation: e.g., consider x=3, y=4, CST=2.
Can you please clarify?
Thanks,
Eugene
-Original Message-
F
ozenfeld
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Optimize combination of comparisons to dec+compare
On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 1:52 AM Eugene Rozenfeld via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> This patch adds a pattern for optimizing x < y || x == XXX_MIN to x <=
> y-1 if y is an integer with
On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 1:52 AM Eugene Rozenfeld via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> This patch adds a pattern for optimizing
> x < y || x == XXX_MIN to x <= y-1
> if y is an integer with TYPE_OVERFLOW_WRAPS.
Do we already handle x < y || x <= CST to x <= y - CST?
That is, the XXX_MIN case is just a speci
This patch adds a pattern for optimizing
x < y || x == XXX_MIN to x <= y-1
if y is an integer with TYPE_OVERFLOW_WRAPS.
This fixes pr96674.
Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
For this function
bool f(unsigned a, unsigned b)
{
return (b == 0) | (a < b);
}
the code without the patch is
test
10 matches
Mail list logo
