This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH 6/6] rs6000: Clean up the various rlwinm patterns
- From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro at linux-mips dot org>
- To: Segher Boessenkool <segher at kernel dot crashing dot org>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, dje dot gcc at gmail dot com
- Date: Sun, 10 May 2015 19:02:33 +0100 (BST)
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] rs6000: Clean up the various rlwinm patterns
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <cover dot 1431268134 dot git dot segher at kernel dot crashing dot org> <31a8639608e417c3b2d23cf3cee84fa7f5720aed dot 1431268135 dot git dot segher at kernel dot crashing dot org>
On Sun, 10 May 2015, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> * Give every define_insn a name;
> * Add missing conditions for some of the dot forms;
> * Use define_insn_and_split to reduce duplication;
> * Renumber operands so 0,1,2,3 are the actual operands of the machine
> instruction, in order;
> * Reformat some patterns.
[...]
> 2015-05-10 Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
>
> * config/rs6000/rs6000.md (*rotlsi3_internal4, *rotlsi3_internal5,
> *rotlsi3_internal6, rlwinm, 5 unnamed define_insns, and 6
> define_splits): Delete.
> (*rotlsi3_mask, *rotlsi3_mask_dot, *rotlsi3_mask_dot2,
> *ashlsi3_imm_mask, *ashlsi3_imm_mask_dot, *ashlsi3_imm_mask_dot2,
> *lshrsi3_imm_mask, *lshrsi3_imm_mask_dot, *lshrsi3_imm_mask_dot2):
> New.
[...]
> diff --git a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.md b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.md
> index d3b1a7a..1fcd69e 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.md
> +++ b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.md
[...]
> @@ -3894,7 +3881,7 @@ (define_insn_and_split "*ashl<mode>3_dot2"
> (set_attr "length" "4,8")])
>
>
> -(define_insn "rlwinm"
> +(define_insn "*ashlsi3_imm_mask"
> [(set (match_operand:SI 0 "gpc_reg_operand" "=r")
> (and:SI (ashift:SI (match_operand:SI 1 "gpc_reg_operand" "r")
> (match_operand:SI 2 "const_int_operand" "i"))
This clearly renames rather than removing the `rlwinm' pattern, please
correctly reflect that in ChangeLog. Some other, unnamed patterns are
given names rather than deleted as well, just as you've noted at the top.
And none of the other changes are mentioned in your ChangeLog entry.
Would you be able to split this change up further by any chance?
Perhaps into the very steps you listed at the top so that each individual
change addresses a single issue only. That would avoid problems with
ChangeLog and make the review easier.
Thanks,
Maciej