https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81611
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81611
--- Comment #24 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Author: aoliva
Date: Wed Feb 28 05:25:34 2018
New Revision: 258053
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258053=gcc=rev
Log:
[PR81611] turn inc-and-use-of-dead-orig into auto-inc
When the addressing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81611
--- Comment #23 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
No, the DOM change is only a partial fix. I've largely approved the auto-inc
change. I recommend the additional tests in c#19 be pulled into a distinct BZ
and the gcc8 regression marker removed once the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81611
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81611
--- Comment #21 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Author: aoliva
Date: Tue Jan 30 17:40:50 2018
New Revision: 257194
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257194=gcc=rev
Log:
[PR81611] accept copies in simple_iv_increment_p
If there are copies between
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81611
--- Comment #20 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
A bit of the bloat reported in PR81625 is also due to missed post-inc
addressing, so it might be worth a look if you are after more test cases.
(Current 8.0.1 perfomrs better than 8.0.0 I used back then:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81611
--- Comment #19 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Hi, thanks for all that work and efforts.
I tried that patch for the following small test:
extern void foo (void);
extern char volatile vv;
void func2 (const int *p)
{
while (1)
{
int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81611
--- Comment #18 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Vacations over, patches formatted and posted.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-01/msg01994.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81611
--- Comment #17 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Created attachment 43025
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43025=edit
another complement to the initial partial patch, this one improving
auto-inc-dec
We already had code to turn the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81611
--- Comment #16 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Even if create_mem_ref_raw created a MEM_REF, we'd still allocate a new pseudo
for the reg - 1 at cfgexpand, and that ends up preventing the post_inc
addressing mode from being selected.
The more I think
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81611
--- Comment #15 from Alexandre Oliva ---
As we create_mem_ref within ivopts, create_mem_ref_raw requires a
valid_mem_ref_p, which in memory_address_addr_space_p calls
targetm.addr_space.legitimate_address_p, and that's
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81611
--- Comment #14 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
MEM_REF (as opposed to TARGET_MEM_REF) should be able to handle any simple
SSA_NAME + CONSTANT_OFFSET which are all we're really concerned with here. THe
target's addressing modes don't really enter the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81611
--- Comment #13 from Alexandre Oliva ---
We do have such constant propagation on such ports as x86* and arm, but not on
avr. Presumably (I haven't checked) it has to do with available addressing
modes, and gimple's avoiding, even in MEM_REFs,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81611
--- Comment #12 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
You know, I wonder if we're missing something bigger here.
ISTM we're potentially missing CSEs in memory addresses as well as forward
propagation opportunities in MEM_REF expressions.
I strongly suspect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81611
--- Comment #11 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Testing has revealed that the alternative complementary candidate patch
introduces a number of regressions, in tests intended specifically to detect
this kind of problem. I don't see an easy way to delay
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81611
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #42971|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81611
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #42969|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81611
--- Comment #8 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Created attachment 42970
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42970=edit
alternative (?) complementary candidate patch
This addresses the concern of post-increment in non-loops. It solves
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81611
--- Comment #7 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Hmm, what the complementary patch won't do is improve the odds of auto_inc or
even saving a temp in spaghetti code, rather than in loops. Maybe that's
important too? I wonder if we should add the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81611
--- Comment #6 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Created attachment 42969
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42969=edit
complementary candidate patch
This patch complements the earlier one.
On AVR, unlike other ports, we had the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81611
--- Comment #5 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Created attachment 42968
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42968=edit
partial candidate patch
Alas, although it restores good code for x86_64 and arm, it doesn't go as far
as enabling
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81611
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
22 matches
Mail list logo
