This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH GCC]Refactor force_expr_to_var_cost and handle type conversion
- From: Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- To: "Bin.Cheng" <amker dot cheng at gmail dot com>
- Cc: "bin.cheng" <bin dot cheng at arm dot com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 13:14:08 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH GCC]Refactor force_expr_to_var_cost and handle type conversion
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <002101cedc88$2eefe620$8ccfb260$ at arm dot com> <CAFiYyc37AaZ-rnrU_mFNUJEa7jbnQ3dvj3Z-A3yn=seR0O9zvg at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAHFci2_8TWJ4mzZB3ZkdgqC_3t4a5TU06Bf6sjd_pWBLx8b6mw at mail dot gmail dot com>
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 8:29 AM, Bin.Cheng <amker.cheng@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 10:06 PM, Richard Biener
> <richard.guenther@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 2:41 PM, bin.cheng <bin.cheng@arm.com> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> This patch refactors force_expr_to_var_cost and handles type conversion
>>> along with other tree nodes. It is split from the patch posted at
>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg00546.html
>>> Bootstrap and test with the patch lowering address expressions on
>>> x86/x86_64/arm. Is it OK?
>>
>> ENOPATCH
>>
> Attached here.
> I think it should be stated that this patch and the lowering one are
> logically one because we rely on this patch to compute cost of lowered
> address expression like "&arr + offset".
> Moreover, address_cost on x86/x86_64 (is 1) are small, so this patch
> has small impact on these two targets. While address_cost on arm (is
> 9) is non-trivial, it has greater impact on ARM. The statement is in
> line with various benchmark data.
Ok.
Thanks,
Richard.
> Thanks,
> bin
> --
> Best Regards.