Hi Jan,
Can you take a look at this patch when you find the time ? This is
being blocked needing an approval from a x86 backend maintainer and
you are the only one listed in the MAINTAINERS file.
Thanks,
-Sriraman.
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Paolo Bonzini bonz...@gnu.org wrote:
On
Hi Richard,
I was wondering if you got a chance to see if this new patch is alright ?.
Thanks,
-Sriraman.
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 2:37 PM, Sriraman Tallam tmsri...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
I moved implicit-zee.c to config/i386. Can you please take another look ?
* tree-pass.h
On 10/01/2009 11:37 PM, Sriraman Tallam wrote:
Hi,
I moved implicit-zee.c to config/i386. Can you please take another look ?
I think this patch is best reviewed by an x86 backend maintainer now.
Thanks for doing the adjustments, BTW.
Paolo
Hi,
I moved implicit-zee.c to config/i386. Can you please take another look ?
* tree-pass.h (pass_implicit_zee): New pass.
* testsuite/gcc.target/i386/zee.c: New test.
* timevar.def (TV_ZEE): New.
* common.opt (fzee): New flag.
* config.gcc: Add
On 08/08/2009 11:59 PM, Sriraman Tallam wrote:
Hi,
Here is a patch to eliminate redundant zero-extension instructions
on x86_64.
The code looks nice! However, since it is very specific to x86 (and x86
patterns), I'd rather see it in the i386 machine-dependent reorg pass.
Thanks!
Paolo Bonzini bonz...@gnu.org writes:
On 08/08/2009 11:59 PM, Sriraman Tallam wrote:
Hi,
Here is a patch to eliminate redundant zero-extension instructions
on x86_64.
The code looks nice! However, since it is very specific to x86 (and
x86 patterns), I'd rather see it in the i386
On 09/24/2009 08:14 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
I don't agree with this. If we want this code to be x86_64 specific,
then it should be done by having the i386 backend add the pass to the
pass manager, much as plugins can add a pass. Adding stuff to
md-reorg is a step backward.
That's true.
On 09/24/2009 08:24 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
We already have the hooks, they have just been stuck in plugin.c when
they should really be in the generic backend. See register_pass.
(Sigh, every time I looked at this I said the pass control has to be
generic but it still wound up in
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 8:25 AM, Paolo Bonzini bonz...@gnu.org wrote:
On 09/24/2009 08:24 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
We already have the hooks, they have just been stuck in plugin.c when
they should really be in the generic backend. See register_pass.
(Sigh, every time I looked at this I
Hi Richard,
I finally got around to getting the data you wanted. Thanks for
the response. Please
find my comments below.
On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 2:15 PM, Richard Guenther
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 11:59 PM, Sriraman Tallamtmsri...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Sriraman Tallam tmsri...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
Here is a patch to eliminate redundant zero-extension instructions
on x86_64.
Tested: Ran the gcc regresssion testsuite on x86_64-linux and verified
that the results are the same with/without this patch.
GCC bootstrap :
Total number of zero-extension instructions before : 1456
Total number of zero-extension instructions after : 5814
No impact on boot-strap time.
You sure you have these numbers the right way around ? Shouldn't the
number of zero-extension instructions after the patch
Sorry, it is the other way around.
Total number of zero-extension instructions before : 5814
Total number of zero-extension instructions after : 1456
Thanks for pointing it.
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan
raman...@gmail.com wrote:
GCC bootstrap :
Total number of
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 3:57 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Sriraman Tallam tmsri...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
Here is a patch to eliminate redundant zero-extension instructions
on x86_64.
Tested: Ran the gcc regresssion testsuite on x86_64-linux and
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 11:59 PM, Sriraman Tallamtmsri...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
Here is a patch to eliminate redundant zero-extension instructions
on x86_64.
Tested: Ran the gcc regresssion testsuite on x86_64-linux and verified
that the results are the same with/without this patch.
The
Hi,
Here is a patch to eliminate redundant zero-extension instructions
on x86_64.
Tested: Ran the gcc regresssion testsuite on x86_64-linux and verified
that the results are the same with/without this patch.
Problem Description :
-
This pass is intended to
16 matches
Mail list logo
