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] |
On 11/08/15 18:05, Jeff Law wrote:
On 08/09/2015 03:20 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 7:26 PM, Jeff Law <law@redhat.com> wrote:So there's a tight relationship between the implementation of bbs_ok_for_cmove_arith and insn_valid_noce_process_p. If there wasn't, then we'd probably be looking to use note_stores and note_uses.Perhaps I'm missing something, but what is wrong with using DF here instead of note_stores/note_uses? All the info on refs/mods of registers is available in the DF caches.Nothing inherently wrong with using DF here.
I have reworked the patch to use FOR_EACH_INSN_DEF and FOR_EACH_INSN_USE in bbs_ok_for_cmove_arith to extracts the refs/mods and it seems to work. Is that what you mean by DF? I'm doing some more testing and hope to post the updated version soon. Thanks, Kyrill
jeff
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |