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 PR middle-end/28690, indexed load/store performance + reload bug


Actually, I meant

   if (REG_P (op))
     return REG_POINTER (op) ? -1 : -2;
   else
     return -3;

Which is how I originally coded it up.

I didn't really understand your example, but you know better than me for sure since you tested your patch and I didn't test my thoughts.

And then swap_commutative_operands_with_target could die entirely. 

How so, since the change to commutative_operand_precedence doesn't
account for the preference of wanting set X X Y over set X Y X?

If you can implement your commutative_operand_precedence change and not lose performance on i386, the whole swap_commutative_operands_with_target should have become pointless.

Paolo

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