This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH Atom][PR middle-end/44382] Tree reassociation improvement
- From: Ilya Enkovich <enkovich dot gnu at gmail dot com>
- To: richard dot guenther at gmail dot com, Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2011 17:45:57 +0400
- Subject: Re: [PATCH Atom][PR middle-end/44382] Tree reassociation improvement
- References: <CAMbmDYYhfpA845e7TA50coQxBrn8-ZgZCVrx6DeX-D8x4MkK7Q@mail.gmail.com> <20110713232837.GA31809@hungry-tiger.westford.ibm.com> <CAFiYyc31XGVFH9NiZuhmeBSg48Uju=ZYVR44cTWnDEbB0TEe4g@mail.gmail.com> <CAFiYyc3gZw9ouZb-4CmVWd9dtYnSMQxY-xZGOoe3txoaev3eCQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAMbmDYa1hwR1WD2kaFW0=x5CbXLt10vs0WcHVgZKjEUeQjAang@mail.gmail.com> <CAFiYyc0fj7gSbCrpPTXs2NjCaG8LOKKReaBvxnv8ZKUEQqaHmg@mail.gmail.com> <CAMbmDYYFckMTNEtJ0F+Mpr9EA5Qf-v-hBYzHHKBD6QZ=NC9XTQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAMbmDYZW_SX08bzQ9z1OdK5fEADc1oYD9GB8GYB8cYjBe+Svpw@mail.gmail.com> <CAFiYyc0aewXE8kxzdiMTfSMPrX=udWMRmM4iVaVRK9kQ_FBGzA@mail.gmail.com> <CAMbmDYb9m6iV3ZS1GS-_HSHezum1tB8G78mg_VYuah3wkA-cAA@mail.gmail.com> <CAFiYyc0t-einW82V6sYLzuwTm=WG1Ej3ngi_dogC4ZS02TtdRg@mail.gmail.com> <CAMbmDYaTTs4HndicGdQkJ4WwvzGMfF21FRgqSj7Rc31OhXwO0A@mail.gmail.com> <CAMbmDYZ+JU2=TJhP5Hdpa78NPOApf47oUbj0yAXrw4cZwP9ivw@mail.gmail.com> <CAFiYyc0opH76_+RRBcycJ7kycx92xfAPPR92hEn+aDM18jY+MQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAMbmDYYc_eYGZ2w+E+rY_zvERUVrhfXkMpnAjxCzKT9_s7-HAA@mail.gmail.com> <CAFiYyc06f5m2njPh3i1kbXc=jUAviUfv3dRPZ3NFxta3feX=mA@mail.gmail.com> <CAMbmDYYuwh9d2c1yBjreKRouU3QLmN5qD+yMKeVr3XqqWGKjMw@mail.gmail.com> <CAFULd4YZtfWPC1qD=XmtXX+QHCBap7COPq-3TVZ4KrW2qMBQUQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAFiYyc0UiPXbhHytVC=a1g3wO2uAf=vURVwunnuiJ=UYZ1y48w@mail.gmail.com>
2011/9/2 Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I assume that you need to split tune attribute to int and FP part to
>> handle reassociation for other targets, since Atom handles both in the
>> same way.
>>
>> Please also describe function return value in the comment (and perhaps
>> in documentation, too).
>>
>> OK with this addition.
>
> Btw, I would expect integer add and integer multiply to have different
> settings for some targets which would mean splitting this up even
> further ...
Which tune attributes are meant here? Is it X86_TUNE_REASSOC_* flags
or new command line param?
Thanks,
Ilya
>
> Richard.
>
>> Thanks,
>> Uros.
>>
>