[PATCH] ARM cmpsi2_addneg fix follow-up (PR target/89506)

2019-03-04 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 03:41:33PM +, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: > > and regtest revealed two code size > > regressions because of that.  Is -1 vs. 1 the only case of immediate > > valid for both "I" and "L" constraints where the former is longer than the > > latter? > > Yes -1 is the only case whi

Re: [PATCH] ARM cmpsi2_addneg fix follow-up (PR target/89506)

2019-03-19 Thread Ramana Radhakrishnan
On 04/03/2019 09:04, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 03:41:33PM +, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: >> > and regtest revealed two code size >> > regressions because of that.  Is -1 vs. 1 the only case of immediate >> > valid for both "I" and "L" constraints where the former is longer than t

Patch ping (Re: [PATCH] ARM cmpsi2_addneg fix follow-up (PR target/89506))

2019-03-12 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Mon, Mar 04, 2019 at 10:04:01AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > The first one uses constraints and no C code in the output, I believe it is > actually more expensive for compile time, because if one just reads what > constrain_operands needs to do for another constraint, it is quite a lot. > I've

Patch ping^2 (Re: [PATCH] ARM cmpsi2_addneg fix follow-up (PR target/89506))

2019-03-19 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 12:43:29PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Mon, Mar 04, 2019 at 10:04:01AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > The first one uses constraints and no C code in the output, I believe it is > > actually more expensive for compile time, because if one just reads what > > constrain_