Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH][tree-optimization]Optimize combination of comparisons to dec+compare
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 2:32 AM Eugene Rozenfeld
wrote:
>
> Richard,
>
> Can you please commit this patch for me? I don't have write access yet, I'm
> still working on getting copyright assignment/disclaimer signed by my
> employer.
Done after re-bootstrapping/testing on x86-64-linux.
Richard.
> Thanks,
>
> Eugene
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Biener
> Sent: Friday, January 15, 2021 3:55 AM
> To: Eugene Rozenfeld
> Cc: gabrav...@gmail.com; ja...@gcc.gnu.org; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH][tree-optimization]Optimize combination of
> comparisons to dec+compare
>
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 10:04 PM Eugene Rozenfeld
> wrote:
> >
> > I got more feedback for the patch from Gabriel Ravier and Jakub Jelinek in
> > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgcc.gnu.org%2Fbugzilla%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D96674data=04%7C01%7CEugene.Rozenfeld%40microsoft.com%7Cf4b1e41de6b4469fd3bb08d8b94c5a20%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637463084866262315%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000sdata=%2Fc77uS%2BNlNGmXwOmK729BByEW0VDiq1HEe8BA7DpI30%3Dreserved=0
> > and re-worked it accordingly.
> >
> > The changes from the previous patch are:
> > 1. Switched the tests to use __attribute__((noipa)) instead of
> > __attribute__((noinline)) .
> > 2. Fixed a type in the pattern comment.
> > 3. Added :c for top-level bit_ior expression.
> > 4. Added :s for the subexpressions.
> > 5. Added a pattern for the negated expression:
> > x >= y && y != XXX_MIN --> x > y - 1
> > and the corresponding tests.
> >
> > The new patch is attached.
>
> OK.
>
> Thanks,
> Richard.
>
> > Eugene
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Richard Biener
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 5, 2021 4:21 AM
> > To: Eugene Rozenfeld
> > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH][tree-optimization]Optimize combination
> > of comparisons to dec+compare
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 9:50 PM Eugene Rozenfeld
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Ping.
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Eugene Rozenfeld
> > > Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2020 3:01 PM
> > > To: Richard Biener ;
> > > gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> > > Subject: RE: Optimize combination of comparisons to dec+compare
> > >
> > > Re-sending my question and re-attaching the patch.
> > >
> > > Richard, can you please clarify your feedback?
> >
> > Hmm, OK.
> >
> > The patch is OK.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Richard.
> >
> >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Eugene
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Gcc-patches On Behalf Of
> > > Eugene Rozenfeld via Gcc-patches
> > > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2020 2:06 PM
> > > To: Richard Biener
> > > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> > > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Optimize combination of comparisons to
> > > dec+compare
> > >
> > > Richard,
> > >
> > > > Do we already handle x < y || x <= CST to x <= y - CST?
> > >
> > > That is an invalid transformation: e.g., consider x=3, y=4, CST=2.
> > > Can you please clarify?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Eugene
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Richard Biener
> > > Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 12:21 AM
> > > To: Eugene Rozenfeld
> > > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> > > Subject: Re: Optimize combination of comparisons to dec+compare
> > >
> > > On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 1:52 AM Eugene Rozenfeld via Gcc-patches
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > This patch adds a pattern for optimizing x < y || x == XXX_MIN to
> > > > x <=
> > > > y-1 if y is an integer with TYPE_OVERFLOW_WRAPS.
> > >
> > > Do we already handle x < y || x <= CST to x <= y - CST?
> > > That is, the XXX_MIN case is just a special-case of generic anti-range
> > > testing? For anti-range testing with signed types we pun to unsigned
> > > when possible.
> > >
> > > > This fixes pr96674.
> > > >
> > > > Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
> > > >
> > > > For this function
> > > >
> > > > bool f(unsigned a, unsigned b)
> > > > {
> > > > return (b == 0) | (a < b);
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > the code without the patch is
> > > >
> > > > test esi,esi
> > > > sete al
> > > > cmpesi,edi
> > > > seta dl
> > > > or eax,edx
> > > > ret
> > > >
> > > > the code with the patch is
> > > >
> > > > subesi,0x1
> > > > cmpesi,edi
> > > > setae al
> > > > ret
> > > >
> > > > Eugene
> > > >
> > > > gcc/
> > > > PR tree-optimization/96674
> > > > * match.pd: New pattern x < y || x == XXX_MIN --> x <= y - 1
> > > >
> > > > gcc/testsuite
> > > > * gcc.dg/pr96674.c: New test.
> > > >
RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH][tree-optimization]Optimize combination of comparisons to dec+compare
Richard,
Can you please commit this patch for me? I don't have write access yet, I'm
still working on getting copyright assignment/disclaimer signed by my employer.
Thanks,
Eugene
-Original Message-
From: Richard Biener
Sent: Friday, January 15, 2021 3:55 AM
To: Eugene Rozenfeld
Cc: gabrav...@gmail.com; ja...@gcc.gnu.org; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH][tree-optimization]Optimize combination of
comparisons to dec+compare
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 10:04 PM Eugene Rozenfeld
wrote:
>
> I got more feedback for the patch from Gabriel Ravier and Jakub Jelinek in
> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgcc.gnu.org%2Fbugzilla%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D96674data=04%7C01%7CEugene.Rozenfeld%40microsoft.com%7Cf4b1e41de6b4469fd3bb08d8b94c5a20%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637463084866262315%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000sdata=%2Fc77uS%2BNlNGmXwOmK729BByEW0VDiq1HEe8BA7DpI30%3Dreserved=0
> and re-worked it accordingly.
>
> The changes from the previous patch are:
> 1. Switched the tests to use __attribute__((noipa)) instead of
> __attribute__((noinline)) .
> 2. Fixed a type in the pattern comment.
> 3. Added :c for top-level bit_ior expression.
> 4. Added :s for the subexpressions.
> 5. Added a pattern for the negated expression:
> x >= y && y != XXX_MIN --> x > y - 1
> and the corresponding tests.
>
> The new patch is attached.
OK.
Thanks,
Richard.
> Eugene
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Biener
> Sent: Tuesday, January 5, 2021 4:21 AM
> To: Eugene Rozenfeld
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH][tree-optimization]Optimize combination
> of comparisons to dec+compare
>
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 9:50 PM Eugene Rozenfeld
> wrote:
> >
> > Ping.
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Eugene Rozenfeld
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2020 3:01 PM
> > To: Richard Biener ;
> > gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> > Subject: RE: Optimize combination of comparisons to dec+compare
> >
> > Re-sending my question and re-attaching the patch.
> >
> > Richard, can you please clarify your feedback?
>
> Hmm, OK.
>
> The patch is OK.
>
> Thanks,
> Richard.
>
>
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Eugene
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Gcc-patches On Behalf Of
> > Eugene Rozenfeld via Gcc-patches
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2020 2:06 PM
> > To: Richard Biener
> > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Optimize combination of comparisons to
> > dec+compare
> >
> > Richard,
> >
> > > Do we already handle x < y || x <= CST to x <= y - CST?
> >
> > That is an invalid transformation: e.g., consider x=3, y=4, CST=2.
> > Can you please clarify?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Eugene
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Richard Biener
> > Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 12:21 AM
> > To: Eugene Rozenfeld
> > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> > Subject: Re: Optimize combination of comparisons to dec+compare
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 1:52 AM Eugene Rozenfeld via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > This patch adds a pattern for optimizing x < y || x == XXX_MIN to
> > > x <=
> > > y-1 if y is an integer with TYPE_OVERFLOW_WRAPS.
> >
> > Do we already handle x < y || x <= CST to x <= y - CST?
> > That is, the XXX_MIN case is just a special-case of generic anti-range
> > testing? For anti-range testing with signed types we pun to unsigned when
> > possible.
> >
> > > This fixes pr96674.
> > >
> > > Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
> > >
> > > For this function
> > >
> > > bool f(unsigned a, unsigned b)
> > > {
> > > return (b == 0) | (a < b);
> > > }
> > >
> > > the code without the patch is
> > >
> > > test esi,esi
> > > sete al
> > > cmpesi,edi
> > > seta dl
> > > or eax,edx
> > > ret
> > >
> > > the code with the patch is
> > >
> > > subesi,0x1
> > > cmpesi,edi
> > > setae al
> > > ret
> > >
> > > Eugene
> > >
> > > gcc/
> > > PR tree-optimization/96674
> > > * match.pd: New pattern x < y || x == XXX_MIN --> x <= y - 1
> > >
> > > gcc/testsuite
> > > * gcc.dg/pr96674.c: New test.
> > >
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH][tree-optimization]Optimize combination of comparisons to dec+compare
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 10:04 PM Eugene Rozenfeld
wrote:
>
> I got more feedback for the patch from Gabriel Ravier and Jakub Jelinek in
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96674 and re-worked it
> accordingly.
>
> The changes from the previous patch are:
> 1. Switched the tests to use __attribute__((noipa)) instead of
> __attribute__((noinline)) .
> 2. Fixed a type in the pattern comment.
> 3. Added :c for top-level bit_ior expression.
> 4. Added :s for the subexpressions.
> 5. Added a pattern for the negated expression:
> x >= y && y != XXX_MIN --> x > y - 1
> and the corresponding tests.
>
> The new patch is attached.
OK.
Thanks,
Richard.
> Eugene
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Biener
> Sent: Tuesday, January 5, 2021 4:21 AM
> To: Eugene Rozenfeld
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH][tree-optimization]Optimize combination of
> comparisons to dec+compare
>
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 9:50 PM Eugene Rozenfeld
> wrote:
> >
> > Ping.
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Eugene Rozenfeld
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2020 3:01 PM
> > To: Richard Biener ;
> > gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> > Subject: RE: Optimize combination of comparisons to dec+compare
> >
> > Re-sending my question and re-attaching the patch.
> >
> > Richard, can you please clarify your feedback?
>
> Hmm, OK.
>
> The patch is OK.
>
> Thanks,
> Richard.
>
>
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Eugene
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Gcc-patches On Behalf Of
> > Eugene Rozenfeld via Gcc-patches
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2020 2:06 PM
> > To: Richard Biener
> > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Optimize combination of comparisons to
> > dec+compare
> >
> > Richard,
> >
> > > Do we already handle x < y || x <= CST to x <= y - CST?
> >
> > That is an invalid transformation: e.g., consider x=3, y=4, CST=2.
> > Can you please clarify?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Eugene
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Richard Biener
> > Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 12:21 AM
> > To: Eugene Rozenfeld
> > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> > Subject: Re: Optimize combination of comparisons to dec+compare
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 1:52 AM Eugene Rozenfeld via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > This patch adds a pattern for optimizing x < y || x == XXX_MIN to x
> > > <=
> > > y-1 if y is an integer with TYPE_OVERFLOW_WRAPS.
> >
> > Do we already handle x < y || x <= CST to x <= y - CST?
> > That is, the XXX_MIN case is just a special-case of generic anti-range
> > testing? For anti-range testing with signed types we pun to unsigned when
> > possible.
> >
> > > This fixes pr96674.
> > >
> > > Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
> > >
> > > For this function
> > >
> > > bool f(unsigned a, unsigned b)
> > > {
> > > return (b == 0) | (a < b);
> > > }
> > >
> > > the code without the patch is
> > >
> > > test esi,esi
> > > sete al
> > > cmpesi,edi
> > > seta dl
> > > or eax,edx
> > > ret
> > >
> > > the code with the patch is
> > >
> > > subesi,0x1
> > > cmpesi,edi
> > > setae al
> > > ret
> > >
> > > Eugene
> > >
> > > gcc/
> > > PR tree-optimization/96674
> > > * match.pd: New pattern x < y || x == XXX_MIN --> x <= y - 1
> > >
> > > gcc/testsuite
> > > * gcc.dg/pr96674.c: New test.
> > >
RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH][tree-optimization]Optimize combination of comparisons to dec+compare
I got more feedback for the patch from Gabriel Ravier and Jakub Jelinek in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96674 and re-worked it accordingly.
The changes from the previous patch are:
1. Switched the tests to use __attribute__((noipa)) instead of
__attribute__((noinline)) .
2. Fixed a type in the pattern comment.
3. Added :c for top-level bit_ior expression.
4. Added :s for the subexpressions.
5. Added a pattern for the negated expression:
x >= y && y != XXX_MIN --> x > y - 1
and the corresponding tests.
The new patch is attached.
Eugene
-Original Message-
From: Richard Biener
Sent: Tuesday, January 5, 2021 4:21 AM
To: Eugene Rozenfeld
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH][tree-optimization]Optimize combination of
comparisons to dec+compare
On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 9:50 PM Eugene Rozenfeld
wrote:
>
> Ping.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Eugene Rozenfeld
> Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2020 3:01 PM
> To: Richard Biener ;
> gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: RE: Optimize combination of comparisons to dec+compare
>
> Re-sending my question and re-attaching the patch.
>
> Richard, can you please clarify your feedback?
Hmm, OK.
The patch is OK.
Thanks,
Richard.
> Thanks,
>
> Eugene
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Gcc-patches On Behalf Of
> Eugene Rozenfeld via Gcc-patches
> Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2020 2:06 PM
> To: Richard Biener
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Optimize combination of comparisons to
> dec+compare
>
> Richard,
>
> > Do we already handle x < y || x <= CST to x <= y - CST?
>
> That is an invalid transformation: e.g., consider x=3, y=4, CST=2.
> Can you please clarify?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Eugene
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Biener
> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 12:21 AM
> To: Eugene Rozenfeld
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Optimize combination of comparisons to dec+compare
>
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 1:52 AM Eugene Rozenfeld via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> >
> > This patch adds a pattern for optimizing x < y || x == XXX_MIN to x
> > <=
> > y-1 if y is an integer with TYPE_OVERFLOW_WRAPS.
>
> Do we already handle x < y || x <= CST to x <= y - CST?
> That is, the XXX_MIN case is just a special-case of generic anti-range
> testing? For anti-range testing with signed types we pun to unsigned when
> possible.
>
> > This fixes pr96674.
> >
> > Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
> >
> > For this function
> >
> > bool f(unsigned a, unsigned b)
> > {
> > return (b == 0) | (a < b);
> > }
> >
> > the code without the patch is
> >
> > test esi,esi
> > sete al
> > cmpesi,edi
> > seta dl
> > or eax,edx
> > ret
> >
> > the code with the patch is
> >
> > subesi,0x1
> > cmpesi,edi
> > setae al
> > ret
> >
> > Eugene
> >
> > gcc/
> > PR tree-optimization/96674
> > * match.pd: New pattern x < y || x == XXX_MIN --> x <= y - 1
> >
> > gcc/testsuite
> > * gcc.dg/pr96674.c: New test.
> >
0002-Optimize-combination-of-comparisons-to-dec-compare.patch
Description: 0002-Optimize-combination-of-comparisons-to-dec-compare.patch
