http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53315
Andi Kleen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53315
--- Comment #19 from eraman at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-22 21:07:40 UTC ---
Author: eraman
Date: Wed Aug 22 21:07:30 2012
New Revision: 190601
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=190601
Log:
2012-08-22 Easwaran Raman
Backp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53315
--- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-05-14
18:47:09 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon May 14 18:47:05 2012
New Revision: 187477
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187477
Log:
2012-05-14 Andrew Pinski
H.J. Lu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53315
--- Comment #17 from Uros Bizjak 2012-05-12 16:36:39
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #15)
> Do you think machine reorg could be done without slowing down the compiler?
Yes, xbegin RTM pattern can raise a flag that triggers machine reorg (so it
won
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53315
--- Comment #16 from Uros Bizjak 2012-05-12 16:31:21
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> Like this?
Yes, this is OK, after someone confirms that the testcase works as expected on
HW or simulator.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53315
--- Comment #15 from Andi Kleen 2012-05-12
16:06:00 UTC ---
Oh yes and it would be really nice to have those peepholes for xbegin Jakub.
I normally use my own macros with asm goto to avoid the ugly code.
Do you think machine reorg could be done
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53315
--- Comment #14 from Andi Kleen 2012-05-12
16:04:27 UTC ---
I can confirm the simple test program works correctly with Jakub's patch.
I'll leave full bootstrap to HJ.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53315
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #27385|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53315
--- Comment #12 from Uros Bizjak 2012-05-12 11:29:53
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> Created attachment 27385 [details]
> gcc48-pr53315.patch
Please introduce check-rtm.h header for use in runtime testcases, as is the
case with i.e. check-ss
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53315
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-05-12
09:14:53 UTC ---
Created attachment 27385
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27385
gcc48-pr53315.patch
That is because the patch is buggy. Fixed thusly, though haven't tested it on
/53315] simple xtest program generates ICE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53315
--- Comment #9 from Andi Kleen 2012-05-11
21:35:47 UTC ---
Sorry I was wrong earlier. Retested now fully with a full test case and HJs
patch and i always get aborts
The xbegin gets miscompiled now, the in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53315
--- Comment #9 from Andi Kleen 2012-05-11
21:35:47 UTC ---
Sorry I was wrong earlier. Retested now fully with a full test case and HJs
patch and i always get aborts
The xbegin gets miscompiled now, the in transaction branch disappears.
400460
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53315
--- Comment #8 from Andi Kleen 2012-05-11
18:02:43 UTC ---
I tested HJs fix on the test case and also on a more complex program and it all
works as expected. Please commit.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53315
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53315
--- Comment #6 from Uros Bizjak 2012-05-11 09:41:15
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Created attachment 27370 [details]
> A patch
Patch looks OK to me, but please let Andi play with this a bit, so we are sure
we won't hit some other reload lim
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53315
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu 2012-05-11 03:14:45
UTC ---
Created attachment 27370
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27370
A patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53315
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski 2012-05-10
23:47:57 UTC ---
(define_expand "xbegin"
[(set (match_operand:SI 0 "register_operand")
(unspec_volatile:SI [(match_dup 1)] UNSPECV_XBEGIN))]
"TARGET_RTM"
{
rtx label = gen_label_rtx ();
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53315
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski 2012-05-10
23:44:01 UTC ---
Reload does not know how to handle reloading into jump instructions.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53315
--- Comment #2 from Uros Bizjak 2012-05-10 23:42:05
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Hmm it goes away when i remove the (status = _xbegin)
> so it may be actually xbegin not xtest
Yes, it is xbegin_1 insn pattern that doesn't get registers all
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53315
Andi Kleen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kirill.yukhin at intel dot
20 matches
Mail list logo
