This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
[PING^1][PATCH v4 3/3] PR80791 Consider doloop cmp use in ivopts
- From: "Kewen.Lin" <linkw at linux dot ibm dot com>
- To: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Cc: Segher Boessenkool <segher at kernel dot crashing dot org>, wschmidt at linux dot ibm dot com, bin dot cheng at linux dot alibaba dot com, rguenther at suse dot de, jakub at redhat dot com, Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>, Kugan Vivekanandarajah <kugan dot vivekanandarajah at linaro dot org>
- Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 10:15:22 +0800
- Subject: [PING^1][PATCH v4 3/3] PR80791 Consider doloop cmp use in ivopts
- References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20190620090859.GU7313@gate.crashing.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
I'd like to gentle ping the below patch:
The previous version for more context/background:
Thanks a lot in advance!
on 2019/6/20 下午8:16, Kewen.Lin wrote:
> Sorry, the previous patch is incomplete.
> New one attached. Sorry for inconvenience.
> on 2019/6/20 下午8:08, Kewen.Lin wrote:
>> Hi Segher,
>>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 07:47:34PM +0800, Kewen.Lin wrote:
>>>> +/* Return true if count register for branch is supported. */
>>>> +static bool
>>>> +rs6000_have_count_reg_decr_p ()
>>>> + return flag_branch_on_count_reg;
>>> rs6000 unconditionally supports these instructions, not just when that
>>> flag is set. If you need to look at the flag, the *caller* of this new
>>> hook should, not every implementation of the hook. So just "return true"
>> Good point! Updated it as hookpod.
>>>> +/* For doloop use, if the algothrim selects some candidate which invalid for
>>> "algorithm", "which is invalid".
>>>> + some cost like zero rather than original inifite cost. The point is to
>> Thanks for catching! I should run spelling check next time. :)
>> New version attached with comments addressed.