[PATCH] Add X86_TUNE_AVOID_LEA_FOR_ADDR
Fri Jan 17 16:55:00 GMT 2014
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 7:55 AM, H.J. Lu <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 7:36 AM, Uros Bizjak <email@example.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 4:17 PM, H.J. Lu <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>>> BTW: There are some ix86_tune == XXX conditions scattered throughout
>>>> LEA handling code. Can these be substituted with appropriate TARGET_*
>>> I have been looking at them closely to check their impacts on
>>> both Haswell and Silvermont. I am planning to keep
>>> the simple LEA -> ADD transformation, but avoid
>>> the complex LEA -> ADD/MOV/SHL transformation.
>> No, I didn't talk about functional change, but about equivalent
>> TARGET_* define that can be used instead of "(ix86_tune ==
>> PROCESSOR_SILVERMONT) || (ix86_tune == PROCESSOR_INTEL)".
> Something like
> #define TARGET_INTEL_SILVERMONT \
> (ix86_tune == PROCESSOR_SILVERMONT || ix86_tune == PROCESSOR_INTEL)
I see what I meant. I will submit a patch.
More information about the Gcc-patches