On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 1:26 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich....@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2016-04-29 12:48 GMT+03:00 Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com>:
>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 12:36 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich....@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> That's what I have in my draft for DImode immediates:
>>>
>>> @@ -3114,6 +3123,20 @@ scalar_chain::build (bitmap candidates,
>>> unsigned insn_uid)
>>> BITMAP_FREE (queue);
>>> }
>>>
>>> +/* Return a cost of building a vector costant
>>> + instead of using a scalar one. */
>>> +
>>> +int
>>> +scalar_chain::vector_const_cost (rtx exp)
>>> +{
>>> + gcc_assert (CONST_INT_P (exp));
>>> +
>>> + if (const0_operand (exp, GET_MODE (exp))
>>> + || constm1_operand (exp, GET_MODE (exp)))
>>
>> The above should just use
>>
>> standard_sse_constant_p (exp, V2DImode).
>
> Thanks for the tip! Surprisingly this replacement caused a different
> cost for non-standard constants. Looking at it in GDB I found:
>
> (gdb) p exp
> $3 = (rtx) 0x7ffff7f0b560
> (gdb) pr
> warning: Expression is not an assignment (and might have no effect)
> (const_int -1085102592571150096 [0xf0f0f0f0f0f0f0f0])
> (gdb) p constm1_operand (exp,GET_MODE (exp))
> $4 = 1
>
> Do I misuse constm1_operand?
No, it is just a typo that crept in constm1_operand:
;; Match exactly -1.
(define_predicate "constm1_operand"
(and (match_code "const_int")
(match_test "op = constm1_rtx")))
There should be a test, not an assignment.
Uros.
