This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Prefer mempcpy to memcpy on x86_64 target (PR middle-end/81657).
- From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- To: Martin Liška <mliska at suse dot cz>
- Cc: Richard Biener <rguenther at suse dot de>, Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Marc Glisse <marc dot glisse at inria dot fr>, "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:19:15 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Prefer mempcpy to memcpy on x86_64 target (PR middle-end/81657).
- References: <4ca9c192-84f2-95ba-ffd7-1c9aa9be1dfd@suse.cz> <20180321103425.GJ8577@tucnak> <aeef50db-3550-08b3-22c4-4067696abe08@suse.cz> <20180328143114.GK8577@tucnak> <adc4fa95-1f8e-67ae-ffeb-81c1f239674b@suse.cz> <20180328163652.GL8577@tucnak> <772b1171-2321-67d9-85e7-358a5cad0efa@suse.cz> <20180329122532.GP8577@tucnak> <17bbc039-e511-4fbe-d534-3d6d21aadc00@suse.cz> <2d812eaf-8ea0-68e8-089b-0c3d89a203d8@suse.cz>
- Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:31:04PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>
> 2018-03-28 Martin Liska <mliska@suse.cz>
>
> * gcc.dg/string-opt-1.c:
I guess you really didn't mean to keep the above entry around, just the one
below, right?
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>
> 2018-03-14 Martin Liska <mliska@suse.cz>
>
> * gcc.dg/string-opt-1.c: Adjust scans for i386 and glibc target
> and others.
> --- a/gcc/config.gcc
> +++ b/gcc/config.gcc
> @@ -1607,6 +1607,7 @@ x86_64-*-linux* | x86_64-*-kfreebsd*-gnu)
> x86_64-*-linux*)
> tm_file="${tm_file} linux.h linux-android.h i386/linux-common.h i386/linux64.h"
> extra_options="${extra_options} linux-android.opt"
> + extra_objs="${extra_objs} x86-linux.o"
> ;;
The should go into the i[34567]86-*-linux*) case too (outside of the
if test x$enable_targets = xall; then conditional).
Or maybe better, remove the above and do it in:
i[34567]86-*-linux* | x86_64-*-linux*)
extra_objs="${extra_objs} cet.o"
tmake_file="$tmake_file i386/t-linux i386/t-cet"
;;
spot, just add x86-linux.o next to cet.o.
> --- a/gcc/config/i386/linux.h
> +++ b/gcc/config/i386/linux.h
> @@ -24,3 +24,5 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. If not see
>
> #undef MUSL_DYNAMIC_LINKER
> #define MUSL_DYNAMIC_LINKER "/lib/ld-musl-i386.so.1"
> +
> +#define SUBTARGET_LIBC_FUNC_SPEED ix86_linux_libc_func_speed
> diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/linux64.h b/gcc/config/i386/linux64.h
> index f2d913e30ac..d855f5cc239 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/i386/linux64.h
> +++ b/gcc/config/i386/linux64.h
> @@ -37,3 +37,5 @@ see the files COPYING3 and COPYING.RUNTIME respectively. If not, see
> #define MUSL_DYNAMIC_LINKER64 "/lib/ld-musl-x86_64.so.1"
> #undef MUSL_DYNAMIC_LINKERX32
> #define MUSL_DYNAMIC_LINKERX32 "/lib/ld-musl-x32.so.1"
> +
> +#define SUBTARGET_LIBC_FUNC_SPEED ix86_linux_libc_func_speed
And the above two changes should be replaced by a change in
gcc/config/i386/linux-common.h.
> +#include "coretypes.h"
> +#include "cp/cp-tree.h" /* This is why we're a separate module. */
Why do you need cp/cp-tree.h? That is just too weird.
The function just uses libc_speed (in core-types.h, built_in_function
(likewise), OPTION_GLIBC (config/linux.h).
Jakub