On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 10:08:46AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 05:34:25PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > > Are you sure?
> > > "The UMLAL instruction interprets the values from Rn and Rm as unsigned
> > > integers. It multiplies these integers, and adds the 64-bit r
On 9/27/19 4:17 PM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
On 26/09/2019 07:49, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 10:06:13PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
>> (insn 13 12 14 2 (set (reg:SI 124)
>> (const_int -939524096 [0xc800])) "j.c":10:54 161
>> {*arm_movsi_insn}
>>
On 26/09/2019 07:49, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 10:06:13PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
(insn 13 12 14 2 (set (reg:SI 124)
(const_int -939524096 [0xc800])) "j.c":10:54 161
{*arm_movsi_insn}
(nil))
(insn 14 13 16 2 (parallel [
(set (reg:SI 132)
On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 05:34:25PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > Are you sure?
> > "The UMLAL instruction interprets the values from Rn and Rm as unsigned
> > integers. It multiplies these integers, and adds the 64-bit result to the
> > 64-bit unsigned integer contained in RdHi and RdLo."
>
On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 12:30:50AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 05:17:40PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 10:06:13PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> > > (insn 14 13 16 2 (parallel [
> > > (set (reg:SI 132)
> > > (plus:SI (m
On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 05:17:40PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 10:06:13PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> > (insn 14 13 16 2 (parallel [
> > (set (reg:SI 132)
> > (plus:SI (mult:SI (zero_extend:DI (reg/v:SI 115 [ sec ]))
> >
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 10:06:13PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> (insn 14 13 16 2 (parallel [
> (set (reg:SI 132)
> (plus:SI (mult:SI (zero_extend:DI (reg/v:SI 115 [ sec ]))
> (zero_extend:DI (reg:SI 124)))
> (reg:SI 130)))
>
On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 03:27:50PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> > Some machines support a multiplication that generates a product wider
> > than the operands. Write the pattern for this as
> >
> > @smallexample
> > (mult:@var{m} (sign_extend:@var{m} @var{x}) (sign_extend:@var{m} @var{y}))
> > @end sm
On 9/26/19 10:05 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 10:01:56AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 9/26/19 9:47 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 09:39:31AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
Right. My point is that the multiplication patterns are an exception as
well.
>>
> On Sep 26, 2019, at 12:01 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>
> On 9/26/19 9:47 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 09:39:31AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
>>> Right. My point is that the multiplication patterns are an exception as
>>> well.
>>
>> Do you have some evidence for that?
> It's in
On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 10:01:56AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 9/26/19 9:47 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 09:39:31AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> >> Right. My point is that the multiplication patterns are an exception as
> >> well.
> >
> > Do you have some evidence for that?
>
On 9/26/19 9:47 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 09:39:31AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
>> Right. My point is that the multiplication patterns are an exception as
>> well.
>
> Do you have some evidence for that?
It's in the manual. And yes it potentially makes a huge mess due to th
On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 09:39:31AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> Right. My point is that the multiplication patterns are an exception as
> well.
Do you have some evidence for that? I mean, e.g. simplify-rtx.c will in
that case almost certainly misbehave, if some expression can have CONST_INT
operand(
On 9/26/19 9:22 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 09:12:34AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 9/26/19 12:49 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 10:06:13PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
(insn 13 12 14 2 (set (reg:SI 124)
(const_int -939524096 [0xc8000
On 9/26/19 4:32 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 9/26/19 9:14 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 9/26/19 4:12 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 9/26/19 12:49 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 10:06:13PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
(insn 13 12 14 2 (set (reg:SI 124)
(const_int -939524096 [0xfff
On 9/26/19 9:14 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>
> On 9/26/19 4:12 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 9/26/19 12:49 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> > On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 10:06:13PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
>> >> (insn 13 12 14 2 (set (reg:SI 124)
>> >> (const_int -939524096 [0xc800])) "j.c":10
On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 09:12:34AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 9/26/19 12:49 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 10:06:13PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> >> (insn 13 12 14 2 (set (reg:SI 124)
> >> (const_int -939524096 [0xc800])) "j.c":10:54 161
> >> {*arm_movsi_insn
On 9/26/19 4:12 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 9/26/19 12:49 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 10:06:13PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
>> (insn 13 12 14 2 (set (reg:SI 124)
>> (const_int -939524096 [0xc800])) "j.c":10:54 161
>> {*arm_movsi_insn}
>> (nil))
>>
>> (insn
On 9/26/19 12:49 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 10:06:13PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
>> (insn 13 12 14 2 (set (reg:SI 124)
>> (const_int -939524096 [0xc800])) "j.c":10:54 161
>> {*arm_movsi_insn}
>> (nil))
>>
>> (insn 14 13 16 2 (parallel [
>> (
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 10:06:13PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> (insn 13 12 14 2 (set (reg:SI 124)
> (const_int -939524096 [0xc800])) "j.c":10:54 161
> {*arm_movsi_insn}
> (nil))
>
> (insn 14 13 16 2 (parallel [
> (set (reg:SI 132)
> (plus:SI (mult:
> commit fa761b10d40aaa71e62fbc0c9f2ab8fc07a98b49 (HEAD, refs/bisect/bad)
> Author: wilco
> Date: Wed Sep 18 18:33:30 2019 +
>
> [ARM] Cleanup 64-bit multiplies
>
> Cleanup 64-bit multiplies. Combine the expanders using iterators.
> Merge the signed/unsigned multiplies as
21 matches
Mail list logo
