This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
I'm attaching a new version of the patch. Fixed all comments and retested. No regression on qemu --with-cpu cortex-a9. Thank you, Greta gcc/ChangeLog 2012-02-29 Greta Yorsh <Greta.Yorsh@arm.com> * config/arm/arm-ldmstm.ml (write_ldm_commutative_peephole): Improved conditions of peepholes generating LDM followed by commutative operator. * config/arm/ldmstm.md: Regenerated. > -----Original Message----- > From: Ramana Radhakrishnan [mailto:ramana.radhakrishnan@linaro.org] > Sent: 29 February 2012 00:41 > To: Greta Yorsh > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; ramana@gcc.gnu.org; paul@codesourcery.com; > nickc@redhat.com > Subject: Re: [PATCH,ARM] Improve peepholes for LDM with commutative > operators > > [Sorry about the duplicate mail. My mailer seems to have eaten up the > original reply I sent. ] > > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 05:09:05PM -0000, Greta Yorsh wrote: > > Is it OK for GCC 4.7 Stage 4 ? > > This is stage4 - I'd like to hear what the RM's think. Technically > it's fixing a regression and is low risk to me. > > In any case there are a couple of changes that I'd like done > as explained below. > > > > > Thank you, > > > > Greta > > > > gcc/ChangeLog > > > > 2012-02-28 Greta Yorsh <Greta.Yorsh@arm.com> > > > > * config/arm/arm-ldmstm.ml: Improved conditions of peepholes > that > > generate > > LDM followed by a commutative operator. > > * config/arm/ldmstm.md: Regenerated. > > Can you mention which 2 peepholes are changed in some way. > > > diff --git a/gcc/config/arm/arm-ldmstm.ml b/gcc/config/arm/arm- > ldmstm.ml > > index 221edd2..5f5a5e0 100644 > > --- a/gcc/config/arm/arm-ldmstm.ml > > +++ b/gcc/config/arm/arm-ldmstm.ml > > @@ -216,9 +216,10 @@ let write_ldm_commutative_peephole thumb = > > Printf.printf "%s (match_operand:SI %d > \"s_register_operand\" \"\")]))\n" indent (nregs * 2 + 3); > > Printf.printf "%s (clobber (reg:CC CC_REGNUM))])]\n" indent > > end; > > - Printf.printf " \"(((operands[%d] == operands[0] && operands[%d] > == operands[1])\n" (nregs * 2 + 2) (nregs * 2 + 3); > > - Printf.printf " || (operands[%d] == operands[0] && > operands[%d] == operands[1]))\n" (nregs * 2 + 3) (nregs * 2 + 2); > > - Printf.printf " && peep2_reg_dead_p (%d, operands[0]) && > peep2_reg_dead_p (%d, operands[1]))\"\n" (nregs + 1) (nregs + 1); > > + Printf.printf " \"(((rtx_equal_p (operands[%d], operands[0]) && > rtx_equal_p (operands[%d], operands[1]))\n" (nregs * 2 + 2) (nregs * 2 > + 3); > > + Printf.printf " || (rtx_equal_p (operands[%d], operands[0]) && > rtx_equal_p (operands[%d], operands[1])))\n" (nregs * 2 + 3) (nregs * 2 > + 2); > > + Printf.printf " && (peep2_reg_dead_p (%d, operands[0]) || > rtx_equal_p (operands[0], operands[%d]))\n" (nregs + 1) (nregs * 2); > > + Printf.printf " && (peep2_reg_dead_p (%d, operands[1]) || > rtx_equal_p (operands[1], operands[%d])))\"\n" (nregs + 1) (nregs * 2); > > begin > > if thumb then > > Printf.printf " [(set (match_dup %d) (match_op_dup %d > [(match_dup %d) (match_dup %d)]))]\n" > > diff --git a/gcc/config/arm/ldmstm.md b/gcc/config/arm/ldmstm.md > > index 5db4a32..5db3d57 100644 > > --- a/gcc/config/arm/ldmstm.md > > +++ b/gcc/config/arm/ldmstm.md > > @@ -1160,9 +1160,10 @@ > > [(match_operand:SI 6 "s_register_operand" "") > > (match_operand:SI 7 "s_register_operand" "")])) > > (clobber (reg:CC CC_REGNUM))])] > > - "(((operands[6] == operands[0] && operands[7] == operands[1]) > > - || (operands[7] == operands[0] && operands[6] == operands[1])) > > - && peep2_reg_dead_p (3, operands[0]) && peep2_reg_dead_p (3, > operands[1]))" > > + "(((rtx_equal_p (operands[6], operands[0]) && rtx_equal_p > (operands[7], operands[1])) > > + || (rtx_equal_p (operands[7], operands[0]) && rtx_equal_p > (operands[6], operands[1]))) > > + && (peep2_reg_dead_p (3, operands[0]) || rtx_equal_p > (operands[0], operands[4])) > > + && (peep2_reg_dead_p (3, operands[1]) || rtx_equal_p > (operands[1], operands[4])))" > > Line > 80 characters - > > > > [(parallel > > [(set (match_dup 4) (match_op_dup 5 [(match_dup 6) (match_dup > 7)])) > > (clobber (reg:CC CC_REGNUM))])] > > @@ -1180,9 +1181,10 @@ > > (match_operator:SI 5 "commutative_binary_operator" > > [(match_operand:SI 6 "s_register_operand" "") > > (match_operand:SI 7 "s_register_operand" "")]))] > > - "(((operands[6] == operands[0] && operands[7] == operands[1]) > > - || (operands[7] == operands[0] && operands[6] == operands[1])) > > - && peep2_reg_dead_p (3, operands[0]) && peep2_reg_dead_p (3, > operands[1]))" > > + "(((rtx_equal_p (operands[6], operands[0]) && rtx_equal_p > (operands[7], operands[1])) > > + || (rtx_equal_p (operands[7], operands[0]) && rtx_equal_p > (operands[6], operands[1]))) > > Again line > 80 characters. > > Instead of rtx_equal_p, check that the REGNOs are equal. > That will be cheaper: we know these are register_operands. > > For bonus points you use peep2_regno_dead_p with REGNO (operands[n]) > instead of peep2_reg_dead_p. If we are accessing REGNO might as well > reuse it :). > > regards > Ramana
Attachment:
ldm-commute.v3.patch.txt
Description: Text document
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |