On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 3:50 PM, Bernd Edlinger <bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de> wrote: > On 11/18/16 12:58, Christophe Lyon wrote: >> On 17 November 2016 at 10:23, Kyrill Tkachov >> <kyrylo.tkac...@foss.arm.com> wrote: >>> >>> On 09/11/16 12:58, Bernd Edlinger wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi! >>>> >>>> >>>> This patch enables the ldrd/strd peephole rules unconditionally. >>>> >>>> It is meant to fix cases, where the patch to reduce the sha512 >>>> stack usage splits ldrd/strd instructions into separate ldr/str insns, >>>> but is technically independent from the other patch: >>>> >>>> See https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg00523.html >>>> >>>> It was necessary to change check_effective_target_arm_prefer_ldrd_strd >>>> to retain the true prefer_ldrd_strd tuning flag. >>>> >>>> >>>> Bootstrapped and reg-tested on arm-linux-gnueabihf. >>>> Is it OK for trunk? Hi Bernd, Any update on the other patch you mentioned? This one breaks bootstrap of arm-linux-gnueabihf with certain options like "--with-arch=armv7-a --with-fpu=neon --with-float=hard". I created PR78453 for tracking.
Thanks, bin >>> >>> >>> This is ok. >>> Thanks, >>> Kyrill >>> >> >> Hi Bernd, >> >> Since you committed this patch (r242549), I'm seeing the new test >> failing on some arm*-linux-gnueabihf configurations: >> >> FAIL: gcc.target/arm/pr53447-5.c scan-assembler-times ldrd 10 >> FAIL: gcc.target/arm/pr53447-5.c scan-assembler-times strd 9 >> >> See >> http://people.linaro.org/~christophe.lyon/cross-validation/gcc/trunk/242549/report-build-info.html >> for a map of failures. >> >> Am I missing something? > > Hi Christophe, > > as always many thanks for your testing... > > I have apparently only looked at the case -mfloat-abi=soft here, which > is what my other patch is going to address. But all targets with > -mfpu=neon -mfloat-abi=hard can also use vldr.64 instead of ldrd > and vstr.64 instead of strd, which should be accepted as well. > > So the attached patch should fix at least most of the fallout. > > Is it OK for trunk? > > > Thanks > Bernd.
