On 09/01/2014 11:03 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 05:59:56PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 08/14/2014 05:50 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
I hope the scheduler doesn't attempt to swap sp += 24 with flags setter
because of the sp += 16 vs. flags setter dependency and sp += 24 vs. s
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 05:59:56PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 08/14/2014 05:50 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >I hope the scheduler doesn't attempt to swap sp += 24 with flags setter
> >because of the sp += 16 vs. flags setter dependency and sp += 24 vs. sp +=
> >16 dependency, but I feel kind of
On 08/14/2014 05:50 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
I hope the scheduler doesn't attempt to swap sp += 24 with flags setter
because of the sp += 16 vs. flags setter dependency and sp += 24 vs. sp +=
16 dependency, but I feel kind of uneasy with find_inc assuming the recorded
dependency is the one for th
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 11:49:37AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 11:34:04AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > So, to set DEP_MULTIPLE even in the case where ask_depencency_caches
> > returns DEP_PRESENT, you'd need to find the old dependency anyway (isn't
> > that going to be
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 11:34:04AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> So, to set DEP_MULTIPLE even in the case where ask_depencency_caches
> returns DEP_PRESENT, you'd need to find the old dependency anyway (isn't
> that going to be expensive and totally kill all the effects of
> true_dependency_cache?)
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 05:12:49AM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 08/12/2014 09:35 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >As detailed in the PR, find_inc ignored any possible clobbers on
> >inc_insn (typically %cc/flags/etc. register) and thus we could ignore
> >all register dependencies between mem_insn an
On 08/12/2014 09:35 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
As detailed in the PR, find_inc ignored any possible clobbers on
inc_insn (typically %cc/flags/etc. register) and thus we could ignore
all register dependencies between mem_insn and inc_insn even when
we could only safely ignore the mem_reg0 register d
On 08/12/2014 03:35 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> As detailed in the PR, find_inc ignored any possible clobbers on
> inc_insn (typically %cc/flags/etc. register) and thus we could ignore
> all register dependencies between mem_insn and inc_insn even when
> we could only safely ignore the mem_r
