Hi!
Richard Biener writes:
> On Thu, 10 Mar 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> Richard Biener writes:
>>
>> > On Wed, 9 Mar 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Hi!
>> >>
>> >> Richard Biener writes:
>> >>
>> >> > On Tue, 8 Mar 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Jiufu Guo
On Thu, 10 Mar 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> Richard Biener writes:
>
> > On Wed, 9 Mar 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >> Richard Biener writes:
> >>
> >> > On Tue, 8 Mar 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Jiufu Guo writes:
> >> >>
> >> >> Hi!
> >> >>
> >> >> >
Hi!
Richard Biener writes:
> On Wed, 9 Mar 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> Richard Biener writes:
>>
>> > On Tue, 8 Mar 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
>> >
>> >> Jiufu Guo writes:
>> >>
>> >> Hi!
>> >>
>> >> > Hi Sehger,
>> >> >
>> >> > Segher Boessenkool writes:
>> >> >
>> >> >> On T
On Wed, 9 Mar 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> Richard Biener writes:
>
> > On Tue, 8 Mar 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
> >
> >> Jiufu Guo writes:
> >>
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >> > Hi Sehger,
> >> >
> >> > Segher Boessenkool writes:
> >> >
> >> >> On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 10:28:57PM +0800, Jiufu Guo wro
Hi!
Richard Biener writes:
> On Tue, 8 Mar 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
>
>> Jiufu Guo writes:
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> > Hi Sehger,
>> >
>> > Segher Boessenkool writes:
>> >
>> >> On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 10:28:57PM +0800, Jiufu Guo wrote:
>> >>> Segher Boessenkool writes:
>> >>> > No. insn_cost is onl
On Tue, 8 Mar 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
> Jiufu Guo writes:
>
> Hi!
>
> > Hi Sehger,
> >
> > Segher Boessenkool writes:
> >
> >> On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 10:28:57PM +0800, Jiufu Guo wrote:
> >>> Segher Boessenkool writes:
> >>> > No. insn_cost is only for correct, existing instructions, not for
Jiufu Guo writes:
Hi!
> Hi Sehger,
>
> Segher Boessenkool writes:
>
>> On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 10:28:57PM +0800, Jiufu Guo wrote:
>>> Segher Boessenkool writes:
>>> > No. insn_cost is only for correct, existing instructions, not for
>>> > made-up nonsense. I created insn_cost precisely to ge
Hi Sehger,
Segher Boessenkool writes:
> On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 10:28:57PM +0800, Jiufu Guo wrote:
>> Segher Boessenkool writes:
>> > No. insn_cost is only for correct, existing instructions, not for
>> > made-up nonsense. I created insn_cost precisely to get away from that
>> > aspect of r
Hi,
Jeff Law writes:
> On 3/1/2022 12:47 AM, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
>> On Tue, 1 Mar 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
>>
>>> Segher Boessenkool writes:
>>>
On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 09:50:28AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Feb 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
>> And another
On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 10:28:57PM +0800, Jiufu Guo wrote:
> Segher Boessenkool writes:
> > No. insn_cost is only for correct, existing instructions, not for
> > made-up nonsense. I created insn_cost precisely to get away from that
> > aspect of rtx_cost (and some other issues, like, it is incre
On 3/1/2022 12:47 AM, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
On Tue, 1 Mar 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
Segher Boessenkool writes:
On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 09:50:28AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, 24 Feb 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
And another thing as Segher pointed out, CSE is doing too
muc
Segher Boessenkool writes:
Hi!
> Hi!
>
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 03:48:54PM +0800, Jiufu Guo wrote:
>> Segher Boessenkool writes:
>> > That is the problem yes. You need insns to call insn_cost on. You can
>> > look in combine.c:combine_validate_cost to see how this can be done; but
>> > you n
Richard Biener writes:
> On Tue, 1 Mar 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
>
>> Segher Boessenkool writes:
>>
>> > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 09:50:28AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 24 Feb 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
>> >> > And another thing as Segher pointed out, CSE is doing too
>> >> > much work.
On Tue, 1 Mar 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
> Segher Boessenkool writes:
>
> > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 09:50:28AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> On Thu, 24 Feb 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
> >> > And another thing as Segher pointed out, CSE is doing too
> >> > much work. It may be ok to separate the cons
Segher Boessenkool writes:
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 09:50:28AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Thu, 24 Feb 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
>> > And another thing as Segher pointed out, CSE is doing too
>> > much work. It may be ok to separate the constant handling
>> > logic from CSE.
>>
>> Not sure
On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 09:50:28AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Feb 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
> > And another thing as Segher pointed out, CSE is doing too
> > much work. It may be ok to separate the constant handling
> > logic from CSE.
>
> Not sure - CSE just is value numbering, I don
Hi!
On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 03:48:54PM +0800, Jiufu Guo wrote:
> Segher Boessenkool writes:
> > That is the problem yes. You need insns to call insn_cost on. You can
> > look in combine.c:combine_validate_cost to see how this can be done; but
> > you need to have some code to generate in the fi
Richard Biener writes:
> On Fri, 25 Feb 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
>
>> Richard Biener writes:
>>
>> > On Fri, 25 Feb 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
>> >
>> >> Richard Biener writes:
>> >>
>> >> > On Thu, 24 Feb 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Jiufu Guo via Gcc-patches writes:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
On Fri, 25 Feb 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
> Richard Biener writes:
>
> > On Fri, 25 Feb 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
> >
> >> Richard Biener writes:
> >>
> >> > On Thu, 24 Feb 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Jiufu Guo via Gcc-patches writes:
> >> >>
> >> >> > Segher Boessenkool writes:
> >> >>
Richard Biener writes:
> On Fri, 25 Feb 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
>
>> Richard Biener writes:
>>
>> > On Thu, 24 Feb 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
>> >
>> >> Jiufu Guo via Gcc-patches writes:
>> >>
>> >> > Segher Boessenkool writes:
>> >> >
>> >> >> On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 02:02:59PM +0100, Richard Bi
On Fri, 25 Feb 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
> Richard Biener writes:
>
> > On Thu, 24 Feb 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
> >
> >> Jiufu Guo via Gcc-patches writes:
> >>
> >> > Segher Boessenkool writes:
> >> >
> >> >> On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 02:02:59PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> >>> I'm assuming we'
Richard Biener writes:
> On Thu, 24 Feb 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
>
>> Jiufu Guo via Gcc-patches writes:
>>
>> > Segher Boessenkool writes:
>> >
>> >> On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 02:02:59PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
>> >>> I'm assuming we're always dealing with
>> >>>
>> >>> (set (reg:MODE ..)
On Thu, 24 Feb 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
> Jiufu Guo via Gcc-patches writes:
>
> > Segher Boessenkool writes:
> >
> >> On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 02:02:59PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> >>> I'm assuming we're always dealing with
> >>>
> >>> (set (reg:MODE ..) )
> >>>
> >>> here and CSE is not s
Segher Boessenkool writes:
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 07:32:55PM +0800, guojiufu wrote:
>> >We already have TARGET_INSN_COST which you could ask for a cost.
>> >Like if we'd have a single_set then just temporarily substitute
>> >the RHS with the candidate and cost the insns and compare against
>>
Jiufu Guo via Gcc-patches writes:
> Segher Boessenkool writes:
>
>> On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 02:02:59PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> I'm assuming we're always dealing with
>>>
>>> (set (reg:MODE ..) )
>>>
>>> here and CSE is not substituting into random places of an
>>> instruction(?). I
Segher Boessenkool writes:
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 02:02:59PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
>> I'm assuming we're always dealing with
>>
>> (set (reg:MODE ..) )
>>
>> here and CSE is not substituting into random places of an
>> instruction(?). I don't know what 'rtx_cost' should evaluate
>>
On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 07:32:55PM +0800, guojiufu wrote:
> >We already have TARGET_INSN_COST which you could ask for a cost.
> >Like if we'd have a single_set then just temporarily substitute
> >the RHS with the candidate and cost the insns and compare against
> >the original insn cost. So why ex
On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 02:02:59PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> I'm assuming we're always dealing with
>
> (set (reg:MODE ..) )
>
> here and CSE is not substituting into random places of an
> instruction(?). I don't know what 'rtx_cost' should evaluate
> to for a constant, if it should impli
On Wed, 23 Feb 2022, guojiufu wrote:
>
>
> On 2/22/22 PM3:26, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Tue, 22 Feb 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> For constants, there are some codes to check: if it is able to put
> >> to instruction as an immediate operand or it is profitable to load from
>
On 2/22/22 PM3:26, Richard Biener wrote:
On Tue, 22 Feb 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
Hi,
For constants, there are some codes to check: if it is able to put
to instruction as an immediate operand or it is profitable to load from
mem. There are still some places that could be improved for platform
On 2022-02-23 01:30, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
Hi Jiu Fu,
On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 02:53:13PM +0800, Jiufu Guo wrote:
static bool
rs6000_cannot_force_const_mem (machine_mode mode ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED,
rtx x)
{
- if (GET_CODE (x) == HIGH
- && GET_CODE (XEXP (x, 0)) == UNSPEC)
+ if (GET_CO
Hi Jiu Fu,
On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 02:53:13PM +0800, Jiufu Guo wrote:
> static bool
> rs6000_cannot_force_const_mem (machine_mode mode ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED, rtx x)
> {
> - if (GET_CODE (x) == HIGH
> - && GET_CODE (XEXP (x, 0)) == UNSPEC)
> + if (GET_CODE (x) == HIGH)
> return true;
Thi
On Tue, 22 Feb 2022, Jiufu Guo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> For constants, there are some codes to check: if it is able to put
> to instruction as an immediate operand or it is profitable to load from
> mem. There are still some places that could be improved for platforms.
>
> This patch could handle PR632
33 matches
Mail list logo
