This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Reduce conservativeness in REE using machine model (issue6631066)
- From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- To: Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google dot com>
- Cc: reply at codereview dot appspotmail dot com, davidxl at google dot com, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 10:23:53 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Reduce conservativeness in REE using machine model (issue6631066)
- References: <20121011214412.5AC876128C@tjsboxrox.mtv.corp.google.com>
- Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 02:44:12PM -0700, Teresa Johnson wrote:
> Revised patch to address conservative behavior in redundant extend
> elimination that was resulting in redundant extends not being
> removed. Now uses a new target hook machine_mode_from_attr_mode
> which is currently enabled only for i386.
I still don't like it, the hook still is about how it is implemented
instead of what target property it wants to ask (the important thing
there is that a {QI,HI} -> SImode zero extension instruction on x86_64
performs {QI,HI} -> DImode extension actually). That isn't the case for any
other modes, isn't the case for sign extension etc.
Can you please post a testcase first?
Given the recent ree.c changes to remember the performed operations and
their original modes (struct ext_modified), perhaps the
"Second, make sure the reaching definitions don't feed another and"...
check could be made less strict or even removed, but for that a testcase is
really needed.
Jakub