I found a way to improve the function find_bswap/find_bswap_or_nop
and reduce its size. Please hold for the review, I will post an updated
version as soon as I finish testing.
Best regards,
Thomas Preud'homme
Please find attached the new version of this patch addressing all your comments.
ChangeLog are now as follows:
*** gcc/ChangeLog ***
2014-05-04 Thomas Preud'homme
PR tree-optimization/54733
* expr.c (get_inner_reference): Add a parameter to control whether a
MEM_REF s
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 3:34 AM, Thomas Preud'homme
wrote:
> See updated part 2 of the patch in attachment. Part 1 is unchanged. New
> ChangeLog are as follows:
>
> *** gcc/ChangeLog ***
>
> 2014-04-23 Thomas Preud'homme
>
> PR tree-optimization/54733
> * tree-ssa-math-opts.c (
>
> Bootstrapped on x86_64-linux-gnu with no testsuite regression. Also did a
> arm-none-eabi cross build with no regression after running testsuite via
> qemu
Forgot to ask if it's ok for trunk. Same question for part 1 and 3.
Best regards,
Thomas
See updated part 2 of the patch in attachment. Part 1 is unchanged. New
ChangeLog are as follows:
*** gcc/ChangeLog ***
2014-04-23 Thomas Preud'homme
PR tree-optimization/54733
* tree-ssa-math-opts.c (find_bswap_load): New.
(find_bswap_1): Add support for memory sourc
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 7:19 AM, Thomas Preud'homme
wrote:
>> From: Richard Biener [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
>>
>> With handling only the outermost handled-component and then only a
>> selected subset you'll catch many but not all cases. Why not simply
>> use get_inner_reference () here
> From: Richard Biener [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
>
> With handling only the outermost handled-component and then only a
> selected subset you'll catch many but not all cases. Why not simply
> use get_inner_reference () here (plus stripping the constant offset
> from an innermost MEM_REF
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Thomas Preud'homme
wrote:
>> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
>> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Rainer Orth
>>
>> Just omit the { target *-*-* } completely, also a few more times.
>
> Please find attached an updated patch.
@@ -1733,6 +1743,
> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Rainer Orth
>
> Just omit the { target *-*-* } completely, also a few more times.
Please find attached an updated patch.
Best regards,
Thomas
gcc32rm-84.3.2.part2.diff
Description: Binary data
> From: Richard Biener [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
>
> "More like" isn't enough to answer this - do you have a testcase? (usually
> these end up in undefined-overflow and/or conversion-to-sizetype issues)
I do. See attachment. This testcase needs to be compiled with patch 2/3
applied. As
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 9:04 AM, Thomas Preud'homme
wrote:
>> From: Marc Glisse [mailto:marc.gli...@inria.fr]
>>
>> Uh? It does fold a+1-a for me. What it doesn't do is look through the
>> definition of b in b-a. Richard+GSoC will supposedly soon provide a
>> function that does that.
>
> Oh right,
> From: Marc Glisse [mailto:marc.gli...@inria.fr]
>
> Uh? It does fold a+1-a for me. What it doesn't do is look through the
> definition of b in b-a. Richard+GSoC will supposedly soon provide a
> function that does that.
Oh right, it's a bit more complex here since the array index is converted
to
On Wed, 2 Apr 2014, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
Note that as it stands the patch does not work for arrays indexed with
variable (such a tab[a] || (tab[a+1] << 8)) because fold_const does not
fold (a + 1) - a.
Uh? It does fold a+1-a for me. What it doesn't do is look through the
definition of b
13 matches
Mail list logo
