On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 08:10:27PM -0400, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> PowerPC describes the pattern were we don't need the result of n after a
> compare as:
Except that we *do* need the result of N after the compare in this case.
r~
My question is: where and how would you suggest we do this
optimization. With peephole2? Or in combine? In i386.md, I see
pattern *subsi_2 looks like what I'd like to combine these two insn
into:
(define_insn "*subsi_2"
[(set (reg FLAGS_REG)
(compare
My question is: where and how would you suggest we do this
optimization. With peephole2? Or in combine? In i386.md, I see pattern
*subsi_2 looks like what I'd like to combine these two insn into:
(define_insn "*subsi_2"
[(set (reg FLAGS_REG)
(compare
(minus:SI (match_operand:SI 1
On Oct 13, 2005, at 7:41 PM, Evan Cheng wrote:
Hi,
Here is a bits of code from bzip2:
#define mswap(zz1, zz2) { int zztmp = zz1; zz1 = zz2; zz2 =
zztmp; }
void foo(int unLo, int unHi, int ltLo, int *ptr, char *block, int med,
int d, int n) {
while (1) {
if (unLo > unHi) br
[Sorry, pressed the wrong key combination again for the other mail... ]
On Friday 14 October 2005 01:41, Evan Cheng wrote:
> gcc produces the following code:
You're not giving enough information for me to reproduce it. I used
"-O2 -march=i686 -dAP" for the follow annotated assembler output:
#(in
On Friday 14 October 2005 01:41, Evan Cheng wrote:
#(insn:TI 126 125 40 (parallel [
#(set (reg:SI 0 ax [71])
#(minus:SI (reg:SI 0 ax [71])
#(reg:SI 5 di)))
#(clobber (reg:CC 17 flags))
#]) 242 {*subsi_1} (insn_list:REG_DEP_TRUE 12
Hi,
Here is a bits of code from bzip2:
#define mswap(zz1, zz2) { int zztmp = zz1; zz1 = zz2; zz2 =
zztmp; }
void foo(int unLo, int unHi, int ltLo, int *ptr, char *block, int
med, int d, int n) {
while (1) {
if (unLo > unHi) break;
n = ((int)block[ptr[unLo]+d]) - med;
