https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36041
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
--- Comment #25 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36041
--- Comment #24 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #23)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #18)
> > I think it is a bad idea to introduce the IFUNC into libgcc_s, because then
> > while you speed up the few users o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36041
--- Comment #23 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #18)
> I think it is a bad idea to introduce the IFUNC into libgcc_s, because then
> while you speed up the few users of this builtin, you slow down all users of
> libgcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36041
--- Comment #22 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Jun 28 09:28:40 2013
New Revision: 200506
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=200506&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/36041
* libgcc2.c (POPCOUNTCST2, POPCOUNTCST4, POPCOU
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36041
--- Comment #21 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 30382
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30382&action=edit
gcc49-pr36041.patch
Untested libgcc2.c implementation (no hw support). HW support is IMHO best
dealt on the com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36041
--- Comment #20 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #18)
> I think it is a bad idea to introduce the IFUNC into libgcc_s, because then
> while you speed up the few users of this builtin, you slow down all users of
> libgcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36041
--- Comment #19 from Cristian Rodríguez ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #18)
> I think it is a bad idea to introduce the IFUNC into libgcc_s, because then
> while you speed up the few users of this builtin, you slow down all users of
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36041
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #18
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36041
--- Comment #17 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #15)
> (In reply to Cristian Rodríguez from comment #14)
> > Because it will be useless to general purpose distributions of course.
>
> Then ifunc for this short of a fu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36041
--- Comment #16 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #13)
> I think it is a bad idea to use ifunc for such a function as most of the
> time it is link against statically in most cases.
g++ links to it dynamically by defaul
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36041
--- Comment #15 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Cristian Rodríguez from comment #14)
> Because it will be useless to general purpose distributions of course.
Then ifunc for this short of a function is not useful either. Then maybe we
should
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36041
--- Comment #14 from Cristian Rodríguez ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #13)
> (In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #12)
Why can't you compile
> your code with -march=native for the places where you know you are going to
> compile an
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36041
--- Comment #13 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #12)
> Created attachment 30381 [details]
> IFUNC proof of concept patch
I think it is a bad idea to use ifunc for such a function as most of the time
it is link against
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36041
--- Comment #12 from Marc Glisse ---
Created attachment 30381
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30381&action=edit
IFUNC proof of concept patch
Sadly, libgcc is compiled with gcc and not g++ so we can't use the recent
multiversio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36041
--- Comment #11 from Cristian Rodríguez ---
Not to be annoying, but compiling the test case attached to this bug report
with clang 3.3 produces code in where
inline u32 popcount64_1(u64 x) { return __builtin_popcountll(x); }
is over 3 times fa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36041
Gunther Piez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gpiez at web dot de
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36041
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu.org |glisse at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36041
José Salavert Torres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jsalavert at gmail dot com
--- Com
--- Comment #7 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-21 01:34 ---
Given Richard's comment, I am confirming this.
Joseph,
bugzilla is too busy to keep track of conversations. If you have questions
about gcc development, go to g...@gcc.gnu.org. See also
http://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.h
--- Comment #6 from intvnut at gmail dot com 2008-04-29 03:42 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> It should be possible to have an alternate implementation in libgcc2.c by
> means
> of just selecting on a proper architecture define or the size of the argument
> mode.
>
I see where it would
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-25 14:52 ---
It should be possible to have an alternate implementation in libgcc2.c by means
of just selecting on a proper architecture define or the size of the argument
mode.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=
--- Comment #4 from intvnut at gmail dot com 2008-04-25 12:29 ---
Is there a mechanism to provide different implementations based on the target
(or in this case, class of target)? The byte count approach certainly is more
appropriate for 8-bit targets, sure, but what about the rest of u
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-25 08:44 ---
The implementation is written so it is also reasonable on targets like the AVR
which only has 8bit registers...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36041
--- Comment #2 from intvnut at gmail dot com 2008-04-25 00:39 ---
When run on my Opteron 280 system, the four separate implementations give the
following run times:
popcount64_1 = 1313 clocks
popcount64_2 = 648 clocks
popcount64_3 = 374 clocks
popcount64_4 = 549 clocks
24 matches
Mail list logo
