Ok.
David
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Sriraman Tallam wrote:
> Hi David,
>
>I had to fix a couple of tests. I have attached the patch with the
> fixed tests. The fixes are simple. The tests fail due to two reasons:
>
> 1) Tests like bmi2-pext32-1a.c fail because the vectorize loop is
>
Hi David,
I had to fix a couple of tests. I have attached the patch with the
fixed tests. The fixes are simple. The tests fail due to two reasons:
1) Tests like bmi2-pext32-1a.c fail because the vectorize loop is
unrolled and directive { "scan-assembler-times "bmi2_pext_si3" 1 }
fails because
ok.
David
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 4:46 PM, Sriraman Tallam wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
>> I think it might be better to introduce a new parameter for max peel
>> insn at O2 (e.g, call it MAX_O2_COMPLETELY_PEEL_INSN or
>> MAX_DEFAULT_...), and use the same
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> I think it might be better to introduce a new parameter for max peel
> insn at O2 (e.g, call it MAX_O2_COMPLETELY_PEEL_INSN or
> MAX_DEFAULT_...), and use the same logic in your patch to override the
> MAX_COMPLETELY_PEELED_INSN paramete
I think it might be better to introduce a new parameter for max peel
insn at O2 (e.g, call it MAX_O2_COMPLETELY_PEEL_INSN or
MAX_DEFAULT_...), and use the same logic in your patch to override the
MAX_COMPLETELY_PEELED_INSN parameter at O2).
By so doing, we don't need to have a hard coded factor o
Hi,
Currently, tree unrolling pass(cunroll) does not allow any code
size growth in O2 mode. Code size growth is permitted only if O3 or
funroll-loops/fpeel-loops is used. I have created a patch to allow
partial code size increase in O2 mode. With funroll-loops the maximum
allowed code growt
