This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Small optimization for emit_case_bit_tests (PR tree-optimization/63464)
- From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- To: Richard Biener <rguenther at suse dot de>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2014 13:04:39 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Small optimization for emit_case_bit_tests (PR tree-optimization/63464)
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20141010104132 dot GF10376 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <alpine dot LSU dot 2 dot 11 dot 1410101253560 dot 20733 at zhemvz dot fhfr dot qr>
- Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 12:55:21PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Oct 2014, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > This patch adds a small optimization to emit_case_bit_tests,
> > instead of emitting (for high, low, mask all constants)
> > (x - low) <= (high - low) && ((1 << (x - low)) & mask)
> > if high is smaller than BITS_PER_WORD and low > 0 we can emit
> > x <= high && ((1 << x) & (mask << low))
> > and avoid subtraction. Do this only if mask << low isn't more costly than
> > mask.
> >
> > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk?
>
> But isn't this a general optimization?
The && always has to mean separate basic blocks, as otherwise it is
undefined behavior. I'd think this optimization would be too specialized
for a general optimization, and unsure in which pass it would be desirable.
> Also testing for RTX costs this early sounds bogus.
Well, the bit test optimization is already decided based on other rtx costs.
Jakub