On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 6:27 AM Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 12:27:39PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > Please put some space here, e.g.:
> ...
> > Can you just name the relevant insn pattern and use
> >
> > emit_insn (gen_bsr_1)?
>
> Here is the updated patch.
On Sat, Jul 31, 2021 at 12:38 PM H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 6:27 AM Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 12:27:39PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > > Please put some space here, e.g.:
> > ...
> > > Can you just name the relevant insn pattern and
On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 6:27 AM Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 12:27:39PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > Please put some space here, e.g.:
> ...
> > Can you just name the relevant insn pattern and use
> >
> > emit_insn (gen_bsr_1)?
>
> Here is the updated patch.
On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 12:27:39PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> Please put some space here, e.g.:
...
> Can you just name the relevant insn pattern and use
>
> emit_insn (gen_bsr_1)?
Here is the updated patch. I'll bootstrap/regtest it tonight.
2021-07-30 Jakub Jelinek
PR
On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 10:36 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> This patch improves emitted code for the non-TARGET_LZCNT case.
> As __builtin_clz* is UB on 0 argument and for !TARGET_LZCNT
> CLZ_VALUE_DEFINED_AT_ZERO is 0, it is UB even at RTL time and so we
> can take advantage of that and
Hi!
This patch improves emitted code for the non-TARGET_LZCNT case.
As __builtin_clz* is UB on 0 argument and for !TARGET_LZCNT
CLZ_VALUE_DEFINED_AT_ZERO is 0, it is UB even at RTL time and so we
can take advantage of that and assume the result will be 0 to 31 or
0 to 63.
Given that, sign or zero
