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, fortran] [0/11] Inline transpose part 1

From: Toon Moene <toon at moene dot org>
To: Steven Bosscher <stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com>
Cc: Mikael Morin <mikael dot morin at sfr dot fr>, "fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org" <fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org>, gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2010 18:47:43 +0200
Subject: Re: [Patch, fortran] [0/11] Inline transpose part 1
References: <4C8254A0.9020907@sfr.fr> <AANLkTimAmQ1xF2iJNkPOTqfpFzneCvZHdKM8je7kJdqQ@mail.gmail.com>

Steven Bosscher wrote:

On Sat, Sep 4, 2010 at 4:16 PM, Mikael Morin <mikael.morin@sfr.fr> wrote:

The bad thing:
With the patches function(transpose(a)) needs a temporary for transpose(a)
which was not needed before. This is due to the trans stage trick which is
gone, and will have to come back save us in gfc_conv_expr_descriptor: this
is the point of the inline transpose part 2 patch serie (to come).


So, does this mean the matmul(transpose(...)) optimization will not
work anymore?
(see http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-08/msg01472.html)

AFAIK Mikael already laid out plans to remedy this regression.

There are still 6 weeks until my 54th birthday (AKA known as the end of stage 1 for 4.6 :-)

--
Toon Moene - e-mail: toon@moene.org - phone: +31 346 214290
Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG  Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
At home: http://moene.org/~toon/; weather: http://moene.org/~hirlam/
Progress of GNU Fortran: http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GFortran#news

References:
- [Patch, fortran] [0/11] Inline transpose part 1
  - From: Mikael Morin
- Re: [Patch, fortran] [0/11] Inline transpose part 1
  - From: Steven Bosscher

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