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] Loop distribution improvements


Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:

>On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 09:21:16AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
>> Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
>> 
>> >On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 08:37:47PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
>> >> Can you factor out a function that returns
>> >> A proper qimode value if possible or null and
>> >> Use it in both places?
>> >
>> >Like this?
>> 
>> You should be able to remove zero, minus one and constructor special
>> casing, no?  Ok, maybe not constructor handling, but at least move
>
>No, because the function is only handling BITS_PER_UNIT == 8 &&
>CHAR_BIT == 8,
>plus is unnecessarily expensive for the common case of storing 0.
>
>But if you want, I can move all that integer_zerop / real_zerop /
>CONSTRUCTOR / integer_all_onesp handling into the function.

Please.

>BTW, the integer_all_onesp stuff is broken for this from what I can
>see, for complex
>numbers it returns true for -1 + 0i where all bytes aren't 0xff, so we
>need
>to rule out COMPLEX_CSTs (or do integer_all_onesp on each part
>instead).
>And TYPE_PRECISION on VECTOR_CSTs won't be what we are looking for.

Hmm, indeed.  Or remove the -1 special casing altogether. Marc is probably right with his note as well.

Richard.

>	Jakub



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