On 14/07/15 13:55, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 09:18:06AM +0100, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Before combine, you have two insns, a negation and an abs, so that is
not so very strange :-)
Oh, hrm, my aarch64 cross was three months old, and this now changed.
Or I messed up. Sorr
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 09:18:06AM +0100, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> >Before combine, you have two insns, a negation and an abs, so that is
> >not so very strange :-)
Oh, hrm, my aarch64 cross was three months old, and this now changed.
Or I messed up. Sorry for the noise.
It does look like the if_
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 07:04:13PM +0800, pins...@gmail.com wrote:
> Combine knows how to use define_split without being an insn.
Combine uses define_split in very different circumstances than it uses
define_insn. In this case, define_split will only do anything if the
"nabs" is combined from th
On 14/07/15 11:40, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 3:13 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 14/07/15 11:06, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 1:18 AM, Kyrill Tkachov
wrote:
Hi Segher,
On 14/07/15 01:38, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 10:48:19AM +0100, K
> On Jul 13, 2015, at 5:48 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> For the testcase in the patch we were generating an extra neg instruction:
>cmp w0, wzr
>csneg w0, w0, w0, ge
>neg w0, w0
>ret
>
> instead of the optimal:
>cmp w0, wzr
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 3:13 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>
> On 14/07/15 11:06, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 1:18 AM, Kyrill Tkachov
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Segher,
>>>
>>> On 14/07/15 01:38, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 10:48:19AM +0100, Kyrill Tka
On 14/07/15 11:06, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 1:18 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Hi Segher,
On 14/07/15 01:38, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 10:48:19AM +0100, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
For the testcase in the patch we were generating an extra neg
instruction:
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 3:06 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 1:18 AM, Kyrill Tkachov
> wrote:
>> Hi Segher,
>>
>> On 14/07/15 01:38, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 10:48:19AM +0100, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
For the testcase in the patch we wer
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 1:18 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> Hi Segher,
>
> On 14/07/15 01:38, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 10:48:19AM +0100, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>>>
>>> For the testcase in the patch we were generating an extra neg
>>> instruction:
>>> cmp w0,
Hi Segher,
On 14/07/15 01:38, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 10:48:19AM +0100, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
For the testcase in the patch we were generating an extra neg instruction:
cmp w0, wzr
csneg w0, w0, w0, ge
neg w0, w0
ret
inste
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 10:48:19AM +0100, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> For the testcase in the patch we were generating an extra neg instruction:
> cmp w0, wzr
> csneg w0, w0, w0, ge
> neg w0, w0
> ret
>
> instead of the optimal:
> cmp w0, wzr
>
Hi all,
For the testcase in the patch we were generating an extra neg instruction:
cmp w0, wzr
csneg w0, w0, w0, ge
neg w0, w0
ret
instead of the optimal:
cmp w0, wzr
csneg w0, w0, w0, lt
ret
The reason is that combine trie
12 matches
Mail list logo
