[Bug target/104345] [12 Regression] "nvptx: Transition nvptx backend to STORE_FLAG_VALUE = 1" patch made some code generation worse

2022-03-02 Thread roger at nextmovesoftware dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104345 Roger Sayle changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug target/104345] [12 Regression] "nvptx: Transition nvptx backend to STORE_FLAG_VALUE = 1" patch made some code generation worse

2022-02-10 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104345 --- Comment #11 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Tom de Vries : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6d98e83b2c919bd9fba2c61333d613bafc37357f commit r12-7168-g6d98e83b2c919bd9fba2c61333d613bafc37357f Author: Roger Sayle Date:

[Bug target/104345] [12 Regression] "nvptx: Transition nvptx backend to STORE_FLAG_VALUE = 1" patch made some code generation worse

2022-02-10 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104345 --- Comment #10 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Tom de Vries : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9bacd7af2e3bba9ddad17e7de4e2d299419d819d commit r12-7167-g9bacd7af2e3bba9ddad17e7de4e2d299419d819d Author: Roger Sayle Date:

[Bug target/104345] [12 Regression] "nvptx: Transition nvptx backend to STORE_FLAG_VALUE = 1" patch made some code generation worse

2022-02-08 Thread tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104345 --- Comment #9 from Thomas Schwinge --- OK! Putting your "nvptx: Add support for 64-bit mul.hi (and other) instructions" on top, that considerably changes (simplifies!) the generated '__muldc3' PTX code; the regression disappears. :-) (I

[Bug target/104345] [12 Regression] "nvptx: Transition nvptx backend to STORE_FLAG_VALUE = 1" patch made some code generation worse

2022-02-08 Thread tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104345 --- Comment #8 from Thomas Schwinge --- Well. Here's another problem. Re-testing things using a "bad" '__muldc3' from a build with your three patches applied, I notice that my '_muldc3-WIP.o' "old"/replacement code uses a 'set.u32.leu.f64',

[Bug target/104345] [12 Regression] "nvptx: Transition nvptx backend to STORE_FLAG_VALUE = 1" patch made some code generation worse

2022-02-08 Thread tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104345 --- Comment #7 from Thomas Schwinge --- All your three patches combined still doesn't help resolve the problem. And, what I realized: they don't even change the Nvidia/CUDA Driver reported "used [...] registers". Does that mean that the Driver

[Bug target/104345] [12 Regression] "nvptx: Transition nvptx backend to STORE_FLAG_VALUE = 1" patch made some code generation worse

2022-02-08 Thread tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104345 --- Comment #6 from Thomas Schwinge --- Created attachment 52372 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52372=edit '_muldc3-WIP.o'

[Bug target/104345] [12 Regression] "nvptx: Transition nvptx backend to STORE_FLAG_VALUE = 1" patch made some code generation worse

2022-02-08 Thread tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104345 --- Comment #5 from Thomas Schwinge --- Created attachment 52371 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52371=edit '_muldc3-bad.o'

[Bug target/104345] [12 Regression] "nvptx: Transition nvptx backend to STORE_FLAG_VALUE = 1" patch made some code generation worse

2022-02-08 Thread tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104345 --- Comment #4 from Thomas Schwinge --- Created attachment 52370 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52370=edit '_muldc3-good.o'

[Bug target/104345] [12 Regression] "nvptx: Transition nvptx backend to STORE_FLAG_VALUE = 1" patch made some code generation worse

2022-02-03 Thread roger at nextmovesoftware dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104345 Roger Sayle changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug target/104345] [12 Regression] "nvptx: Transition nvptx backend to STORE_FLAG_VALUE = 1" patch made some code generation worse

2022-02-03 Thread vries at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104345 --- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries --- (In reply to Roger Sayle from comment #1) > The other patches in the "nvptx Boolean" series are: > patchq3: nvptx: Expand QI mode operations using SI mode instructions. >

[Bug target/104345] [12 Regression] "nvptx: Transition nvptx backend to STORE_FLAG_VALUE = 1" patch made some code generation worse

2022-02-02 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104345 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |12.0