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]

Re: [PATCH] fix PR46029: reimplement if conversion of loads and stores [2nd submitted version of patch]

From: Alan Lawrence <alan dot lawrence at arm dot com>
To: Abe <abe_skolnik at yahoo dot com>
Cc: Sebastian Pop <sebpop at gmail dot com>, Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>, "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:09:15 +0100
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix PR46029: reimplement if conversion of loads and stores [2nd submitted version of patch]
Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
References: <5593142A dot 7020607 at yahoo dot com> <55950935 dot 1060008 at arm dot com> <55959C6F dot 6020809 at yahoo dot com>

Abe wrote:

On 7/2/15 4:49 AM, Alan Lawrence wrote:

As before, I'm still confused here. This still returns false, i.e. bails out of
if-conversion, if the statement could trap. Doesn't the scratchpad let us handle
that? Or do we just not care because it won't be vectorizable anyway???


This seems like an opportunity for more optimization in the future....

==> we get enough benefit from the patch, even without my suggested extrachange. Ok, fair enough! Thanks for the clarification.

Where can I find info on what the different flag values mean?

 > (I had thought they were booleans [...]

Sorry; I don`t know if that is documented anywhere yet.

In this case, (-1) simply means "defaulted": on if the vectorizer is on, and off if it is off.
(0) means "user specified no if conversion" and (1) means "user specified [yes] if conversion".

Ah, right, that makes sense now. Obviously I would like to see this written indoc/ .


Cheers, Alan

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] fix PR46029: reimplement if conversion of loads and stores [2nd submitted version of patch]
  - From: Abe
- Re: [PATCH] fix PR46029: reimplement if conversion of loads and stores [2nd submitted version of patch]
  - From: Abe

References:
- Re: [PATCH] fix PR46029: reimplement if conversion of loads and stores [2nd submitted version of patch]
  - From: Alan Lawrence
- Re: [PATCH] fix PR46029: reimplement if conversion of loads and stores [2nd submitted version of patch]
  - From: Abe

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