Ahh I see, that makes a lot more sense. I’d want to change the
TARGET_SCHED_ADJUST_PRIORITY hook?
Also, would it still make sense to change the costs of expensive loads even
during instruction selection to give opportunities for optimizations like
rematerialization? I’m thinking that it could b
On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 7:28 PM Sasha Krassovsky wrote:
> @Jim I saw you were from SiFive - I noticed that modifying the costs for
> integer multiplies in the riscv_tune_info structs didn’t affect the generated
> code. Could this be why?
rtx_costs is used for instruction selection. For instanc
Thanks for your replies!
I looked into the address spaces, and I think it’s easier to inform the RTX
costs just using the attribute, but it was a good suggestion.
Also, rtx_costs in rtlanal.c indeed seems to be the source of the problem. The
SET expression does not look at the costs of its oper
On Thu, 16 Apr 2020 at 21:02, Baumanns via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hello gcc Team,
>
> currently I work on some very modern c++ projects based on c++20. For my
> tests I would like to compile my code with all three major compilers: g++,
> msvc and llvm/clang to test the latest features (like co_yield).
> F
Hello gcc Team,
currently I work on some very modern c++ projects based on c++20. For my
tests I would like to compile my code with all three major compilers: g++,
msvc and llvm/clang to test the latest features (like co_yield).
Furthermore I have problems with unicode header names.
Unfortunately
