new unroller vs ppc

[tm_gccmail@mail.kloo.net]

On Mon, 7 Apr 2003, Richard Henderson wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 10:02:45PM +0200, Zdenek Dvorak wrote:
> > Then what would you suggest to do?
> 
> Long term I think we should do a new autoinc pass.  Currently
> what we have is split between flow and regmove.
> 
> It would also be nice if it was able to interact with the
> scheduler.  A more aggressive autoinc pass can constrain the
> scheduler too much and reduce overall performance.  This is
> especially visible on ia64.
> 
> 
> r~

To chime in with my two cent's worth:

We need to have an address generation pass which handles all the
idiosyncracies of addressing in one pass, including:

1. Processors with only short displacements in indirect addressing modes.

2. Processors with both short and long displacements in indirect
   adressing modes.

2. Processor with no offsetable addressing modes.

3. Processor with autoincrement/autodecrement.

4. Processors with different combinations of the above for different
   modes.

I don't think all these cases can be handled cleanly with GCSE as has been
suggested recently.

Toshi