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]

[PING ^ 3][PATCH, AArch64] Add doloop_end pattern for -fmodulo-sched


PING?  Is it OK for me to apply this patch?  Thanks.


> 
> > On 11/12/2014 11:01 AM, Yangfei (Felix) wrote:
> > > +(define_expand "doloop_end"
> > >> +  [(use (match_operand 0 "" ""))      ; loop pseudo
> > >> +   (use (match_operand 1 "" ""))]     ; label
> > >> +  ""
> > >> +  "
> > >> +{
> >
> > Drop the "" surrounding the { }.
> >
> >
> > r~
> 
> 
> Hello,
>     I updated the patch with the redundant "" removed.  Is it OK for trunk
> now?
>     I hope this patch can catch up with stage 1 of GCC-5.0.  Thanks.
> 
> 
> Index: gcc/ChangeLog
> =============================================================
> ======
> --- gcc/ChangeLog	(revision 217394)
> +++ gcc/ChangeLog	(working copy)
> @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@
> +2014-11-13  Felix Yang  <felix.yang@huawei.com>
> +
> +	* config/aarch64/aarch64.md (doloop_end): New pattern.
> +
>  2014-11-11  Andrew Pinski  <apinski@cavium.com>
> 
>  	Bug target/61997
> Index: gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.md
> =============================================================
> ======
> --- gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.md	(revision 217394)
> +++ gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.md	(working copy)
> @@ -4087,6 +4087,47 @@
>    [(set_attr "type" "mrs")])
> 
> 
> +;; Define the subtract-one-and-jump insns so loop.c ;; knows what to
> +generate.
> +(define_expand "doloop_end"
> +  [(use (match_operand 0 "" ""))      ; loop pseudo
> +   (use (match_operand 1 "" ""))]     ; label
> +  ""
> +{
> +  /* Currently SMS relies on the do-loop pattern to recognize loops
> +     where (1) the control part consists of all insns defining and/or
> +     using a certain 'count' register and (2) the loop count can be
> +     adjusted by modifying this register prior to the loop.
> +     ??? The possible introduction of a new block to initialize the
> +     new IV can potentially affect branch optimizations.  */
> +  if (optimize > 0 && flag_modulo_sched)
> +    {
> +      rtx s0;
> +      rtx bcomp;
> +      rtx loc_ref;
> +      rtx cc_reg;
> +      rtx insn;
> +      rtx cmp;
> +
> +      if (GET_MODE (operands[0]) != DImode)
> +	FAIL;
> +
> +      s0 = operands [0];
> +      insn = emit_insn (gen_adddi3_compare0 (s0, s0, GEN_INT (-1)));
> +
> +      cmp = XVECEXP (PATTERN (insn), 0, 0);
> +      cc_reg = SET_DEST (cmp);
> +      bcomp = gen_rtx_NE (VOIDmode, cc_reg, const0_rtx);
> +      loc_ref = gen_rtx_LABEL_REF (VOIDmode, operands [1]);
> +      emit_jump_insn (gen_rtx_SET (VOIDmode, pc_rtx,
> +				   gen_rtx_IF_THEN_ELSE (VOIDmode, bcomp,
> +							 loc_ref, pc_rtx)));
> +      DONE;
> +    }
> +  else
> +    FAIL;
> +})
> +
>  ;; AdvSIMD Stuff
>  (include "aarch64-simd.md")


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]