[Bug target/67366] Poor assembly generation for unaligned memory accesses on ARM v6 & v7 cpus
rguenther at suse dot de
gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org
Thu Aug 27 10:21:00 GMT 2015
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67366
--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> ---
On Thu, 27 Aug 2015, rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67366
>
> --- Comment #2 from Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> > I think this boils down to the fact that memcpy expansion is done too late
> > and
> > that (with more recent GCC) the "inlining" done on the GIMPLE level is
> > restricted
> > to !SLOW_UNALIGNED_ACCESS but arm defines STRICT_ALIGNMENT to 1
> > unconditionally.
> >
>
> Yep, we have to define STRICT_ALIGNMENT to 1 because not all load instructions
> work with misaligned addresses (ldm, for example). The only way to handle
> misaligned copies is through the movmisalign API.
Are the movmisalign handled ones reasonably efficient? That is, more
efficient than memcpy/memmove? Then we should experiment with
Index: gcc/gimple-fold.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/gimple-fold.c (revision 227252)
+++ gcc/gimple-fold.c (working copy)
@@ -708,7 +708,9 @@ gimple_fold_builtin_memory_op (gimple_st
/* If the destination pointer is not aligned we must be
able
to emit an unaligned store. */
&& (dest_align >= GET_MODE_ALIGNMENT (TYPE_MODE (type))
- || !SLOW_UNALIGNED_ACCESS (TYPE_MODE (type),
dest_align)))
+ || !SLOW_UNALIGNED_ACCESS (TYPE_MODE (type),
dest_align)
+ || (optab_handler (movmisalign_optab, TYPE_MODE
(type))
+ != CODE_FOR_nothing)))
{
tree srctype = type;
tree desttype = type;
@@ -720,7 +722,10 @@ gimple_fold_builtin_memory_op (gimple_st
srcmem = tem;
else if (src_align < GET_MODE_ALIGNMENT (TYPE_MODE
(type))
&& SLOW_UNALIGNED_ACCESS (TYPE_MODE (type),
- src_align))
+ src_align)
+ && (optab_handler (movmisalign_optab,
+ TYPE_MODE (type))
+ == CODE_FOR_nothing))
srcmem = NULL_TREE;
if (srcmem)
{
More information about the Gcc-bugs
mailing list