On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 10:09 AM, bin.cheng bin.ch...@arm.com wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Bernd Schmidt [mailto:ber...@codesourcery.com]
Sent: Monday, November 18, 2013 8:05 PM
To: Bin Cheng
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH GCC]Compute, cache and use cost of
Ping^2
Thanks,
bin
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 3:08 PM, bin.cheng bin.ch...@arm.com wrote:
Ping in this one.
Hi Bernd, could you please help us on this one?
Sorry for the inconvenience.
Thanks,
bin
-Original Message-
From: Bin.Cheng [mailto:amker.ch...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday,
On 11/04/2013 04:31 AM, bin.cheng wrote:
2013-11-01 Bin Cheng bin.ch...@arm.com
* tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c (enum ainc_type): New.
(address_cost_data): New field.
(get_address_cost): Compute auto-increment rtx cost in ainc_costs.
Use ainc_costs for auto-increment rtx
-Original Message-
From: Bernd Schmidt [mailto:ber...@codesourcery.com]
Sent: Monday, November 18, 2013 8:05 PM
To: Bin Cheng
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH GCC]Compute, cache and use cost of auto-increment rtx
patterns in IVOPT
On 11/04/2013 04:31 AM,
Ping in this one.
Hi Bernd, could you please help us on this one?
Please ignore the previous ping message because I used the wrong email
account.
Sorry for the inconvenience.
Thanks,
bin
-Original Message-
From: Bin.Cheng [mailto:amker.ch...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, November 04, 2013
On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 4:31 AM, bin.cheng bin.ch...@arm.com wrote:
Hi,
The IVOPT in GCC has a problem that it does not use cost of auto-increment
address expression in accounting, while it retreats to cost of address
expression if auto-increment addressing mode is unavailable.
For example,
On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 7:38 PM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 4:31 AM, bin.cheng bin.ch...@arm.com wrote:
Hi,
The IVOPT in GCC has a problem that it does not use cost of auto-increment
address expression in accounting, while it retreats to cost of
