On 25.10.18 16:00, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote:
> Bootstrapped and regtested on s390x-redhat-linux.
>
> Consider the following RTL:
>
> (insn (set (mem/f/c:DI (reg/f:DI 60))
> (const:DI (plus:DI (symbol_ref:DI ("*.LANCHOR0"))
> (const_int 8)))))
>
> generated by cse2 pass. It is matched to movdi_64, resulting in
> the following inefficient code:
>
> larl %r5,.L6 # Load literal pool@
> lg %r1,.L7-.L6(%r5) # Load .LANCHOR0+8
> stgrl %r1,.LANCHOR0
> br %r14
>
> Matching it to movdi_larl improves the code, eliminating one
> instruction and the literal pool entry:
>
> larl %r1,.LANCHOR0+8
> stgrl %r1,.LANCHOR0
> br %r14
>
> Taking it one step further, there is no reason to keep movdi_64 and
> movdi_larl separate, since this could potentially improve code in other
> ways by giving lra one more alternative to choose from.
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> 2018-10-22 Ilya Leoshkevich <i...@linux.ibm.com>
>
> * config/s390/constraints.md (ZL): New constraint.
> * config/s390/s390.c (legitimate_pic_operand_p): Accept LARL
> operands.
> * config/s390/s390.md (movdi_larl): Remove.
> (movdi_64): Add the LARL alternative.
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>
> 2018-10-25 Ilya Leoshkevich <i...@linux.ibm.com>
>
> * gcc.target/s390/global-array-almost-huge-element.c: New test.
> * gcc.target/s390/global-array-almost-negative-huge-element.c: New test.
> * gcc.target/s390/global-array-element-pic.c: New test.
> * gcc.target/s390/global-array-even-element.c: New test.
> * gcc.target/s390/global-array-huge-element.c: New test.
> * gcc.target/s390/global-array-negative-huge-element.c: New test.
> * gcc.target/s390/global-array-odd-element.c: New test.
Ok. Thanks!
Andreas
