> and there needs to be code to actually expand the builtin using optabs.
> And something needs to be done to make match.pd work on the output.
Never mind that bit, that was just due to a function argument type mismatch
on the last argument of the crc built-in functions.
On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 at 08:15, Richard Biener wrote:
> The canonical place to transform loops into builtins would be loop
> distribution.
> Another place would be final value replacement since you basically replace
> the reduction result with a call to the builtin, but I think
> loop-distribution
On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 4:15 PM Joern Rennecke
wrote:
>
> On 15/03/2022, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > Why's this a new pass? Every walk over all insns costs time.
>
> If should typically scan considerably less than all the insns.
>
> > The pass
> > lacks any comments as to what CFG / stmt struct
On 15/03/2022, Richard Biener wrote:
> Why's this a new pass? Every walk over all insns costs time. The pass
> lacks any comments as to what CFG / stmt structure is matched. From
> a quick look it seems like it first(?) statically matches a stmt sequence
> without considering intermediate stmt
On 15/03/2022, Richard Biener wrote:
> Why's this a new pass? Every walk over all insns costs time.
If should typically scan considerably less than all the insns.
> The pass
> lacks any comments as to what CFG / stmt structure is matched.
I've put a file in:
config/riscv/tree-crc-doc.txt
wo
On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 1:32 AM Joern Rennecke
wrote:
>
> Most microprocessors have efficient ways to perform CRC operations, be
> that with lookup tables, rotates, or even special instructions.
> However, because we lack a representation for CRC in the compiler, we
> can't do proper instruction s
On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 at 02:17, Oleg Endo wrote:
> > In my own CRC library I've got ~30 'commonly used' CRC types, based on
> the following generic definition:
> > This being a library makes it relatively easy to tune and customize for
> various systems.
...
> How would that work together with you
Oops, that was meant to go to the list too.
On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 at 01:04, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 5:33 PM Joern Rennecke
> wrote:
> >
> > Most microprocessors have efficient ways to perform CRC operations, be
> > that with lookup tables, rotates, or even special instruc
Hello,
just one question
On Tue, Mar 15 2022, Joern Rennecke wrote:
> Most microprocessors have efficient ways to perform CRC operations, be
> that with lookup tables, rotates, or even special instructions.
> However, because we lack a representation for CRC in the compiler, we
> can't do pro
On Mon, 2022-03-14 at 18:04 -0700, Andrew Pinski via Gcc-patches wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 5:33 PM Joern Rennecke
> wrote:
> >
> > Most microprocessors have efficient ways to perform CRC operations, be
> > that with lookup tables, rotates, or even special instructions.
> > However, because
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 5:33 PM Joern Rennecke
wrote:
>
> Most microprocessors have efficient ways to perform CRC operations, be
> that with lookup tables, rotates, or even special instructions.
> However, because we lack a representation for CRC in the compiler, we
> can't do proper instruction s
Most microprocessors have efficient ways to perform CRC operations, be
that with lookup tables, rotates, or even special instructions.
However, because we lack a representation for CRC in the compiler, we
can't do proper instruction selection. With this patch I seek out to
rectify this,
I've avoid
12 matches
Mail list logo
