> -Original Message-
> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Michael Matz
> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 10:45 PM
> To: Kai Tietz
> Cc: Richard Guenther; Kai Tietz; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Richard
> Henderson
> Subject: Re: [patch t
> -Original Message-
> From: Michael Matz [mailto:m...@suse.de]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2011 11:47 PM
> To: Kai Tietz
> Cc: Jiangning Liu; Richard Guenther; Kai Tietz; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org;
> Richard Henderson
> Subject: Re: [patch tree-optimization]
> -Original Message-
> From: Kai Tietz [mailto:ktiet...@googlemail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 5:36 PM
> To: Jiangning Liu
> Cc: Michael Matz; Richard Guenther; Kai Tietz; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org;
> Richard Henderson
> Subject: Re: [patch tree-optimizati
Hi,
This patch is to fix PR38644 in ARM back-end. OK for trunk?
For every detail, please refer to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38644.
ChangeLog:
2011-11-2 Jiangning Liu
PR rtl-optimization/38644
* config/arm/arm.c (thumb1_expand_epilogue): Add memory barrier
Hi,
For the following code change,
@@ -4212,11 +4064,6 @@ get_computation_cost_at (struct ivopts_d
cost.cost += adjust_setup_cost (data,
add_cost (TYPE_MODE (ctype), speed));
- /* Having offset does not affect runtime cost in case it is added to
- sy
et and no regression found.
Source code Changelog would be:
2011-07-29 Jiangning Liu
* config/arm/arm.md (*ior_scc_scc): Enable for Thumb2 as well.
(*ior_scc_scc_cmp): Likewise
(*and_scc_scc): Likewise.
(*and_scc_scc_cmp): Likewise.
(*and_scc_
day, August 05, 2011 9:20 AM
> To: Jiangning Liu
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH, ARM] Generate conditional compares in Thumb2 state
>
> On 3 August 2011 08:48, Jiangning Liu wrote:
> > This patch is to generate more conditional compare instructions in
>
PING...
BTW, in patch fix_cond_cmp_2.patch, the file mode of thumb2.md is carelessly
changed, so please check attached new patch file fix_cond_cmp_3.patch.
Thanks,
-Jiangning
> -Original Message-
> From: Jiangning Liu [mailto:jiangning@arm.com]
> Sent: Monday, August 08,
hakrish...@linaro.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 6:40 PM
> To: Jiangning Liu
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH, ARM] Generate conditional compares in Thumb2 state
>
> On 10 August 2011 09:20, Jiangning Liu wrote:
> > PING...
>
> >
> &
Attached is the new patch file. Review please!
ChangeLog:
2011-08-18 Jiangning Liu
* config/arm/arm.md (*ior_scc_scc): Enable for Thumb2 as well.
(*ior_scc_scc_cmp): Likewise
(*and_scc_scc): Likewise.
(*and_scc_scc_cmp): Likewise.
(*and_scc_scc_nodom
*/
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "link_error" 0 "optimized" { xfail { !
"alpha*-*-* arm*-*-* powerpc*-*-* cris-*-* crisv32-*-* hppa*-*-* i?86-*-*
mmix-*-* mips*-*-* m68k*-*-* moxie-*-* sparc*-*-* spu-*-* x86_64-*-*" } } }
} */
/* { dg-final { cleanup-tree-dum
PING...
> -Original Message-
> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Jiangning Liu
> Sent: Friday, August 26, 2011 5:56 PM
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: [PATCH, testsuite, ARM] change XFAIL to pass for ARM o
}
// { dg-additional-sources "local1-a.cc" }
#include
ChangeLog:
2011-09-14 Jiangning Liu
* g++.dg/abi/local1.C: Change to XFAIL for ARM EABI target.
Thanks,
-Jiangning
loop unroll and set max-unroll-times to 8,
which is larger than the unrolling times being detected in the cases.
ChangeLog:
2011-09-14 Jiangning Liu
* gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/predcom-1.c: Explicitly turn on
loop unroll and set max unroll times to 8.
* gcc
Hi Mike,
OK. I will wait 24 more hours. If no objections by then, I will get it
checked into trunk.
Thanks,
-Jiangning
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Stump [mailto:mikest...@comcast.net]
> Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2011 3:10 AM
> To: Jiangning Liu
> Cc: gcc-patches
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Guenther [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2011 6:12 PM
> To: Jiangning Liu
> Cc: Mike Stump; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de
> Subject: Re: [PATCH, testsuite] Add loop unro
This patch is fix PR38644, a 3-year-old bug.
>From the discussions in mail list and bugzilla, I think the middle end fix
is a common view. Although there are stills some gaps on how to fix it in
middle end, I think this patch at least moves the problem from back-end to
middle-end, which makes GCC
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrew Pinski [mailto:pins...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 5:31 AM
> To: Jiangning Liu
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix stack red zone bug (PR38644)
>
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 3:26 AM
Fix a typo and CC x86/rs6000/arm ports maintainers.
ChangeLog:
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_stack_using_red_zone): Change inline
to be extern.
(TARGET_STACK_USING_RED_ZONE): New.
* config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_stack_using_red_zone): New.
(TARGET_STA
> Think of it this way. What the IR says is there is no barrier between
> those moves. You either have an implicit barrier (which is what you
> are proposing) or you have it explicitly. I think we all rather have
> more things explicit rather than implicit in the IR. And that has
> been the ove
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Guenther [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 3:41 PM
> To: Jiangning Liu
> Cc: Andrew Pinski; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix stack red zone bug (PR38644)
>
> On Tue,
> > -static inline bool
> > +extern bool
>
> static bool
>
> > ix86_using_red_zone (void)
> > {
> > return TARGET_RED_ZONE && !TARGET_64BIT_MS_ABI;
> > @@ -35958,6 +35958,9 @@ ix86_autovectorize_vector_sizes (void)
> > #define TARGET_STACK_PROTECT_FAIL ix86_stack_protect_fail
> > #endif
> >
age-
> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Jiangning Liu
> Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 2:24 PM
> To: 'Uros Bizjak'
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; j...@suse.cz; geo...@geoffk.org;
> dje@gmail.com; r...@redhat
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Guenther [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 4:39 PM
> To: Jiangning Liu
> Cc: Andrew Pinski; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix stack red zone bug (PR38644)
>
> On Wed,
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Guenther [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 5:20 PM
> To: Jiangning Liu
> Cc: Andrew Pinski; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix stack red zone bug (PR38644)
>
> On Wed,
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Guenther [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 5:56 PM
> To: Jiangning Liu
> Cc: Andrew Pinski; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix stack red zone bug (PR38644)
>
> On Wed,
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Guenther [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2011 5:03 PM
> To: Jiangning Liu
> Cc: Andrew Pinski; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix stack red zone bug (PR38644)
>
> On Thu,
> -Original Message-
> From: Jakub Jelinek [mailto:ja...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2011 6:14 PM
> To: Jiangning Liu
> Cc: 'Richard Guenther'; Andrew Pinski; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix stack red zone bug (PR38644)
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Sandiford [mailto:rdsandif...@googlemail.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 30, 2011 4:15 PM
> To: Jiangning Liu
> Cc: 'Jakub Jelinek'; 'Richard Guenther'; Andrew Pinski; gcc-
> patc...@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Henderson [mailto:r...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2011 3:05 AM
> To: Jiangning Liu
> Cc: 'Jakub Jelinek'; 'Richard Guenther'; Andrew Pinski; gcc-
> patc...@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fi
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Guenther [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 30, 2011 8:57 PM
> To: Jiangning Liu; Jakub Jelinek; Richard Guenther; Andrew Pinski; gcc-
> patc...@gcc.gnu.org; richard.sandif...@linaro.org
> Subject: Re: [PA
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Sandiford
> Date: Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 8:46 PM
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix stack red zone bug (PR38644)
> To: Jiangning Liu
> Cc: Jakub Jelinek , Richard Guenther
> , Andrew Pinski ,
> gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
>
>
>
Hi,
This patch is to XFAIL scev-3.c and scev-5.c.
The bug is going to be fixed after Richard Guenther fix a serials of
problems related to POINTER_PLUS_EXPR and sizetype precision.
Thanks,
-Jiangning
ChangeLog for testsuite:
2012-03-21 Jiangning Liu
PR tree-optimization/52563
The original solution r179307 of stack red zone issue for PR38644 is
completely reverted in ARM/embedded-4_6-branch.
And backport mainline 180964 to ARM/embedded-4_6-branch.
Committed.
Undo changes committed in r179307.
2011-11-16 Jiangning Liu
Backport r180964 from mainline
Backport mainline 178102 and partial r172017 to ARM/embedded-4_6-branch.
Committed.
2011-11-17 Jiangning Liu
Backport r178102 from mainline
2011-08-26 Jiangning Liu
* config/arm/arm.md (*ior_scc_scc): Enable for Thumb2 as well.
(*ior_scc_scc_cmp): Likewise
p...@goof.com
James Lemkejwle...@juniper.net
Kriang Lerdsuwanakij
lerds...@users.sourceforge.net
+Jiangning Liu jiangning@arm.com
Sa Liu sa...@de.ibm.com
Ralph Loader
Hi,
This patch is to implement a peephole like optimization in ARM back-end.
If we have an if condition expression like "((r3 != 0) & r1) != 0",
originally the binary code to be generated is like,
cmp r3, #0
ite eq
moveq r1, #0
andne r1, r1, #1
Hi,
I find which_alternative can't really be used in preparation-statements of
define_insn_and_split, so can this be fixed like below?
For example, I want to use which_alternative in the pattern below,
(define_insn_and_split "*thumb2_movsicc_insn"
[(set (match_operand:SI 0 "s_register_operand"
hes-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Jiangning Liu
> Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 10:18 AM
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: 'Richard Guenther'; Richard Henderson
> Subject: [RFC] Optimization to conditional and/or in ARM back-
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Henderson [mailto:r...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2011 7:55 AM
> To: Jiangning Liu
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [RFC] Use which_alternative in preparation-statements of
> define_insn_and_split
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrew Pinski [mailto:pins...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2011 1:14 PM
> To: Jiangning Liu
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Richard Guenther; Richard Henderson
> Subject: Re: [RFC] Optimization to conditional and/or in ARM back-en
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Henderson [mailto:r...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2011 9:55 AM
> To: Jiangning Liu
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; 'Richard Guenther'
> Subject: Re: [RFC] Use REG_EXPR in back-end (introduced by optimization
&g
This code change intends to improve scev for array element and reduce the
common sub-expressions in loop, which may be introduced by multiple
reference of expression &a[i]. In the end the register pressure may be
reduced in the loop. The test case is simplified from a real benchmark, and
only want
> -Original Message-
> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Jiangning Liu
> Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2011 2:48 PM
> To: 'Richard Henderson'
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; 'Richard Guenther'
mark, and the test case only
tries to detect the GIMPLE level changes.
Bootstraped on x86-32. OK for trunk?
ChangeLog:
2012-01-05 Jiangning Liu
* tree-scalar-evolution (interpret_rhs_expr): generate chrec for
array reference.
ChangeLog for testsuite:
2012-01-05 Jiangning
ight be NULL). You also need to add bitpos to the base address
> (in bytes, of course). Note that the &MEM_REF case would naturally
> work
> with this as well.
OK. New patch is like below, and bootstrapped on x86-32.
ChangeLog:
2012-01-20 Jiangning Liu
* tree-scalar-evolut
> -Original Message-
> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Jiangning Liu
> Sent: Friday, January 20, 2012 5:07 PM
> To: 'Richard Guenther'
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH]
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Guenther [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2012 9:12 PM
> To: Jiangning Liu
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Improve SCEV for array element
>
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 10:06 AM
This patch is to fix PR38644, which is a bug with long history about stack
red zone access, and PR30282 is correlated.
Originally red zone concept is not exposed to middle-end, and back-end uses
special logic to add extra memory barrier RTL and help the correct
dependence in middle-end. This way d
PING...
I just merged with the latest code base and generated new patch as attached.
Thanks,
-Jiangning
> -Original Message-
> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Jiangning Liu
> Sent: 2011年6月28日 4:38 PM
>
lp me?
Thanks,
-Jiangning
-Original Message-
From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org]
On Behalf Of Jiangning Liu
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 8:32 AM
To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; rgue...@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: RE: [RFC] Add middle end hook for stack red zone
om: Ramana Radhakrishnan [mailto:ramana.radhakrish...@linaro.org]
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 6:18 PM
To: Jiangning Liu
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; vmaka...@redhat.com; dje@gmail.com; Richard
Henderson; Ramana Radhakrishnan
Subject: Re: [RFC] Add middle end hook for stack red zone size
2011/7/19 Jia
.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org]
> On Behalf Of Joern Rennecke
> Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2011 10:33 AM
> To: Jiangning Liu
> Cc: g...@gcc.gnu.org; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; vmaka...@redhat.com;
> dje@gmail.com; Richard Henderson; Ramana Radhakrishnan; 'Ramana
> Radhakrishn
nal Message-
> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org]
> On Behalf Of Jakub Jelinek
> Sent: Monday, August 01, 2011 5:12 PM
> To: Jiangning Liu
> Cc: 'Joern Rennecke'; g...@gcc.gnu.org; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org;
> vmaka...@redhat.
ugust 01, 2011 6:31 PM
> To: Jiangning Liu
> Cc: 'Joern Rennecke'; g...@gcc.gnu.org; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org;
> vmaka...@redhat.com; dje@gmail.com; Richard Henderson; Ramana
> Radhakrishnan; 'Ramana Radhakrishnan'
> Subject: Re: [RFC] Add middle end hook for
55 matches
Mail list logo
