Re: [PATCH 1/2] Enable setting sign and unsigned promoted mode (SPR_SIGNED_AND_UNSIGNED)

[Kugan <kugan dot vivekanandarajah at linaro dot org>]

On 01/07/14 18:21, Kugan wrote:
> On 26/06/14 20:12, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 07:41:22PM +1000, Kugan wrote:
>>> 2014-06-26  Kugan Vivekanandarajah  <kuganv@linaro.org>
>>>
>>> 	* calls.c (precompute_arguments): Use new SUBREG_PROMOTED_SET
>>> 	instead of SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_SET
>>
>> Missing full stop.
>>
>>> --- a/gcc/cfgexpand.c
>>> +++ b/gcc/cfgexpand.c
>>> @@ -3297,7 +3297,7 @@ expand_gimple_stmt_1 (gimple stmt)
>>>  	      ;
>>>  	    else if (promoted)
>>>  	      {
>>> -		int unsignedp = SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (target);
>>> +		int unsignedp = SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET (target) & SRP_UNSIGNED;
>>
>> From what I understand, here you want the -1/0/1 value and not 2,
>> so that is
>> int unsignedp = SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET (target);
>> if (unsignedp == SRP_SIGNED_AND_UNSIGNED) unsignedp = SRP_UNSIGNED;
>> I think.  Do you agree?
> 
> I agree.
> 
> 
>> BTW, the final patch will probably need to be tested on one of the weirdo
>> ptr_extend targets (ia64-hpux or x86_64-linux -mx32).
> 
> I am now looking at testing on such targets. I just want to double check
> that x86_64-linux -mx32 is OK for this. When I looked at the src, it
> looked to me #define POINTERS_EXTEND_UNSIGNED -1 is needed for this to
> happen. x86_64-linux -mx32 doesnt seem to fall into thss.
> 
> In addition, I will also test AArch64 ILP32 (#define
> POINTERS_EXTEND_UNSIGNED 1), ARM and x86_64 before posting the patch.
> 
>>> --- a/gcc/expr.c
>>> +++ b/gcc/expr.c
>>> @@ -329,7 +329,7 @@ convert_move (rtx to, rtx from, int unsignedp)
>>>    if (GET_CODE (from) == SUBREG && SUBREG_PROMOTED_VAR_P (from)
>>>        && (GET_MODE_PRECISION (GET_MODE (SUBREG_REG (from)))
>>>  	  >= GET_MODE_PRECISION (to_mode))
>>> -      && SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (from) == unsignedp)
>>> +      && SUBREG_CHECK_PROMOTED_SIGN (from, unsignedp))
>>
>> I think unsignedp (misnamed) may be -1/0/1 here, so either
>> SUBREG_CHECK_PROMOTED_SIGN needs to handle those 3, or you need to use
>> something else.  If it handles all 3 values, then it would be say
>> ((SIGN) == SRP_POINTER ? SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET (RTX) == SRP_POINTER
>>  : (SIGN) == SRP_SIGNED ? SUBREG_PROMOTED_SIGNED_P (RTX)
>>  : SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (RTX))
>> or so.
> 
> I have changed it. I have defined a macro SUBREG_PROMOTED_SIGN for this.
> 
>>
>>>      from = gen_lowpart (to_mode, from), from_mode = to_mode;
>>>  
>>>    gcc_assert (GET_CODE (to) != SUBREG || !SUBREG_PROMOTED_VAR_P (to));
>>> @@ -703,7 +703,7 @@ convert_modes (enum machine_mode mode, enum machine_mode oldmode, rtx x, int uns
>>>  
>>>    if (GET_CODE (x) == SUBREG && SUBREG_PROMOTED_VAR_P (x)
>>>        && GET_MODE_SIZE (GET_MODE (SUBREG_REG (x))) >= GET_MODE_SIZE (mode)
>>> -      && SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (x) == unsignedp)
>>> +      && SUBREG_CHECK_PROMOTED_SIGN (x, unsignedp))
>>>      x = gen_lowpart (mode, SUBREG_REG (x));
>>
>> Similarly.
> 
> 
> I have changed it too.
> 
>>
>>> @@ -5203,24 +5203,25 @@ store_expr (tree exp, rtx target, int call_param_p, bool nontemporal)
>>>  	     == TYPE_PRECISION (TREE_TYPE (exp)))
>>>  	{
>>>  	  if (TYPE_UNSIGNED (TREE_TYPE (exp))
>>> -	      != SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (target))
>>> +	      != SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET (target) & SRP_UNSIGNED)
>>
>> Here TYPE_UNSIGNED is 0 or 1, so if you define SUBREG_PROMOTED_CHECK_SIGN
>> the way suggested above, this would be SUBREG_PROMOTED_CHECK_SIGN then,
>> or if (TYPE_UNSIGNED (TREE_TYPE (exp))
>>        ? SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (target)
>>        : SUBREG_PROMOTED_SIGNED_P (target))
>>
>>>  	    {
>>>  	      /* Some types, e.g. Fortran's logical*4, won't have a signed
>>>  		 version, so use the mode instead.  */
>>>  	      tree ntype
>>>  		= (signed_or_unsigned_type_for
>>> -		   (SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (target), TREE_TYPE (exp)));
>>> +		   (SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET (target) & SRP_UNSIGNED,
>>
>> I'd just use TYPE_UNSIGNED (TREE_TYPE (exp)) here instead,
>> no reason to repeat what the guarding condition did.
> 
> Did you mean !TYPE_UNSIGNED (TREE_TYPE (exp))?. isnât it better to use
> the macro SUBREG_PROMOTED_SIGN (defined earlier as you suggested) here?
> It might be more readable. I am happy to do what you like.
> 
>>
>>> +		    TREE_TYPE (exp)));
>>>  	      if (ntype == NULL)
>>>  		ntype = lang_hooks.types.type_for_mode
>>>  		  (TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (exp)),
>>> -		   SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (target));
>>> +		   SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET (target) & SRP_UNSIGNED);
>>>  
>>>  	      exp = fold_convert_loc (loc, ntype, exp);
>>>  	    }
>>>  
>>>  	  exp = fold_convert_loc (loc, lang_hooks.types.type_for_mode
>>>  				  (GET_MODE (SUBREG_REG (target)),
>>> -				   SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (target)),
>>> +				   SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET (target) & SRP_UNSIGNED),
>>>  				  exp);
>>
>> I believe fold_convert only considers zero and non-zero, so no idea
>> what we want here for SRP_POINTER.  Doing what we used to do would
>> be SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET (target) != SRP_SIGNED.
>>>  
>>>  	  inner_target = SUBREG_REG (target);
>>> @@ -5234,14 +5235,14 @@ store_expr (tree exp, rtx target, int call_param_p, bool nontemporal)
>>>        if (CONSTANT_P (temp) && GET_MODE (temp) == VOIDmode)
>>>  	{
>>>  	  temp = convert_modes (GET_MODE (target), TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (exp)),
>>> -				temp, SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (target));
>>> +				temp, SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET (target) & SRP_UNSIGNED);
>>>  	  temp = convert_modes (GET_MODE (SUBREG_REG (target)),
>>>  			        GET_MODE (target), temp,
>>> -			        SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (target));
>>> +			        SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET (target) & SRP_UNSIGNED);
>>>  	}
>>>  
>>>        convert_move (SUBREG_REG (target), temp,
>>> -		    SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (target));
>>> +		    SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET (target) & SRP_UNSIGNED);
>>
>> In all 3 cases here you want -1/0/1 and treat SRP_SIGNED_AND_UNSIGNED as
>> probably 1, so supposedly you want a macro for that and use it
>> in the 3 cases here, in expand_gimple_stmt_1 etc.
> 
> I have changed this.
> 
>>> --- a/gcc/rtl.h
>>> +++ b/gcc/rtl.h
>>> @@ -1585,29 +1585,67 @@ get_full_set_src_cost (rtx x, struct full_rtx_costs *c)
>>>  #define SUBREG_PROMOTED_VAR_P(RTX)					\
>>>    (RTL_FLAG_CHECK1 ("SUBREG_PROMOTED", (RTX), SUBREG)->in_struct)
>>>  
>>> -#define SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_SET(RTX, VAL)				\
>>> -do {									\
>>> -  rtx const _rtx = RTL_FLAG_CHECK1 ("SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_SET",	\
>>> -				    (RTX), SUBREG);			\
>>> -  if ((VAL) < 0)							\
>>> -    _rtx->volatil = 1;							\
>>> -  else {								\
>>> -    _rtx->volatil = 0;							\
>>> -    _rtx->unchanging = (VAL);						\
>>> -  }									\
>>> -} while (0)
>>> -
>>>  /* Valid for subregs which are SUBREG_PROMOTED_VAR_P().  In that case
>>>     this gives the necessary extensions:
>>> -   0  - signed
>>> -   1  - normal unsigned
>>> +   0  - signed (SPR_SIGNED)
>>> +   1  - normal unsigned (SPR_UNSIGNED)
>>> +   2  - value is both sign and unsign extended for mode
>>> +	(SPR_SIGNED_AND_UNSIGNED).
>>>     -1 - pointer unsigned, which most often can be handled like unsigned
>>>          extension, except for generating instructions where we need to
>>> -	emit special code (ptr_extend insns) on some architectures.  */
>>> +	emit special code (ptr_extend insns) on some architectures
>>> +	(SPR_POINTER). */
>>> +
>>> +const unsigned int SRP_POINTER = -1;
>>> +const unsigned int SRP_SIGNED = 0;
>>> +const unsigned int SRP_UNSIGNED = 1;
>>> +const unsigned int SRP_SIGNED_AND_UNSIGNED = 2;
>>> +
>>> +/* Sets promoted mode for SUBREG_PROMOTED_VAR_P().  */
>>> +#define SUBREG_PROMOTED_SET(RTX, VAL)		                        \
>>> +do {								        \
>>> +  rtx const _rtx = RTL_FLAG_CHECK1 ("SUBREG_PROMOTED_SET",		\
>>> +                                    (RTX), SUBREG);			\
>>> +  switch ((VAL))							\
>>
>> Please avoid the extra ()s, switch (VAL) is enough.
>>
>>> +/* Checks if RTX of SUBREG_PROMOTED_VAR_P() is promotd for given SIGN.  */
>>
>> promoted, typo.
>>
>>> +#define SUBREG_CHECK_PROMOTED_SIGN(RTX, SIGN)	\
>>> +  ((SIGN) ? SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET ((RTX)) != SRP_SIGNED	\
>>> +   : SUBREG_PROMOTED_SIGNED_P ((RTX)))
>>
>> See above.  And note the ((RTX)) should have been (RTX) anyway.
>>
>>> @@ -5587,7 +5587,8 @@ simplify_subreg (enum machine_mode outermode, rtx op,
>>>  	{
>>>  	  newx = gen_rtx_SUBREG (outermode, SUBREG_REG (op), final_offset);
>>>  	  if (SUBREG_PROMOTED_VAR_P (op)
>>> -	      && SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (op) >= 0
>>> +	      && (SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (op)
>>> +		  || (SUBREG_PROMOTED_SIGNED_P (op)))
>>
>> SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET (op) != SRP_POINTER ?
>> Also note the extra ()s.
>>
>>>  	      && GET_MODE_CLASS (outermode) == MODE_INT
>>>  	      && IN_RANGE (GET_MODE_SIZE (outermode),
>>>  			   GET_MODE_SIZE (innermode),
>>> @@ -5595,8 +5596,7 @@ simplify_subreg (enum machine_mode outermode, rtx op,
>>>  	      && subreg_lowpart_p (newx))
>>>  	    {
>>>  	      SUBREG_PROMOTED_VAR_P (newx) = 1;
>>> -	      SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_SET
>>> -		(newx, SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P (op));
>>> +	      SUBREG_PROMOTED_SET (newx, SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET (op));
>>>  	    }
>>>  	  return newx;
>>>  	}
>>
> 
> I have changed the above as well. I will post the patch after testing
> for all the necessary targets.
> 

Hi Jakub,

Please find the patch that addresses these comments.

I have bootstrapped on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu and regression tested
for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, arm-none-linux-gnueabi (using qemu),
aarch64_be-none-elf (Foundation model), aarch64-none-elf
--with-abi=ilp32 (Foundation model) and s390x-ibm-linux (64bit, using
qemu) with no new regression.

Is this OK?

Thanks,
Kugan


ïgcc/
2014-07-07  Kugan Vivekanandarajah  <kuganv@linaro.org>

	* calls.c (precompute_arguments): Use new SUBREG_PROMOTED_SET
	instead of SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_SET.
	(expand_call): Likewise.
	* cfgexpand.c (expand_gimple_stmt_1): Use SUBREG_PROMOTED_SIGN
	to get promoted mode.
	* combine.c (record_promoted_value): Skip > 0 comparison with
	SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P as it now returns only 0 or 1.
	* expr.c (convert_move): Use SUBREG_CHECK_PROMOTED_SIGN instead
	of SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P.
	(convert_modes): Likewise.
	(store_expr): Use SUBREG_PROMOTED_SIGN to get promoted mode.
	Use SUBREG_CHECK_PROMOTED_SIGN instead of SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P.
	(expand_expr_real_1): Use new SUBREG_PROMOTED_SET instead of
	SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_SET.
	* function.c (assign_parm_setup_reg): Use new SUBREG_PROMOTED_SET
	instead of SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_SET.
	* ifcvt.c (noce_emit_cmove): Updated to use SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET and
	SUBREG_PROMOTED_SET.
	* internal-fn.c (ubsan_expand_si_overflow_mul_check): Use
	SUBREG_PROMOTED_SET instead of SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_SET.
	* optabs.c (widen_operand): Use SUBREG_CHECK_PROMOTED_SIGN instead
	of SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P.
	* rtl.h (SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_SET): Remove.
	(SUBREG_PROMOTED_SET): New define.
	(SUBREG_PROMOTED_GET): Likewise.
	(SUBREG_PROMOTED_SIGN): Likewise.
	(SUBREG_PROMOTED_SIGNED_P): Likewise.
	(SUBREG_CHECK_PROMOTED_SIGN): Likewise.
	(SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P): Updated.
	* rtlanal.c (unsigned_reg_p): Use new SUBREG_PROMOTED_SIGN
	instead of SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_GET.
	(nonzero_bits1): Skip > 0 comparison with the results as
	SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P now returns only 0 or 1.
	(num_sign_bit_copies1): Use SUBREG_PROMOTED_SIGNED_P instead
	of !SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P.
	* simplify-rtx.c (simplify_unary_operation_1): Use new
	SUBREG_PROMOTED_SIGNED_P instead of !SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P.
	(simplify_subreg): Use new SUBREG_PROMOTED_SIGNED_P,
	and SUBREG_PROMOTED_SET.

Attachment: p1.txt
Description: Text document