On 2 November 2021 14:43:38 CET, Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On Mon, Nov 1, 2021 at 10:02 PM Bernhard Reutner-Fischer via
>Gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 15:21:03 +0100
>> Aldy Hernandez <al...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I'm not convinced this makes the code clearer to read, especially if
>> > it's not on a critical path. But if you feel strongly, please submit
>> > a patch ;-).
>>
>> No i don't feel strongly about it.
>> Compiling e.g. -O2 ira.o
>> # Overhead Samples Command Shared Object Symbol
>> # ........ ............ ....... ............. .........................
>> #
>> 100.00% 4197 cc1plus cc1plus [.] mark_reachable_blocks
>> 100.00% 22000 cc1plus cc1plus [.]
>> path_oracle::killing_def
>> and the mark_elimination is reload.
>> So it's not just a handful of calls saved but some. And it would be
>> smaller code as it saves a call. Well maybe another day.
>
>Note that single bit set/clear are already implemented as test && set/clear.
>Note that unfortunately the sbitmap bitmap_set/clear_bit overloads do not
>return the previous state of the bit. Maybe providing
All 3 spots here, dse, ira and killing_def do not look at the bit but use it as
a bool, fwiw.
These 3 are the only users I (resp coccinelle) found who do the redundant
bitmap_bit_p, bitmap_clear_bit.
>bitmap_test_and_set_bit () and bitmap_test_and_clear_bit () would be
>better (but note we currently return true when the bit changed, not when
>it was set).
A big portion of users of bitmap_bit_p could use a bitmap_bit_p that returns
bool as is.
The rest would know the bit they asked for, no?
Hence bitmap_bit_p could be changed to return a bool rather easily. testb
instead of testl on x86_64 fwiw.
thanks,
>
>Richard.
>
>> thanks,
>> >
>> > Aldy
>> >
>> > On Mon, Nov 1, 2021 at 3:10 PM Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
>> > <rep.dot....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 01:55:30 +0200
>> > > Bernhard Reutner-Fischer <rep.dot....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 20:13:21 +0200
>> > > > Aldy Hernandez via Gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > > @@ -1306,6 +1307,24 @@ path_oracle::killing_def (tree ssa)
>> > > > > ptr->m_next = m_equiv.m_next;
>> > > > > m_equiv.m_next = ptr;
>> > > > > bitmap_ior_into (m_equiv.m_names, b);
>> > > > > +
>> > > > > + // Walk the relation list an remove SSA from any relations.
>> > > >
>> > > > s/an /and /
>> > > >
>> > > > > + if (!bitmap_bit_p (m_relations.m_names, v))
>> > > > > + return;
>> > > > > +
>> > > > > + bitmap_clear_bit (m_relations.m_names, v);
>> > > >
>> > > > IIRC bitmap_clear_bit returns true if the bit was set, false otherwise,
>> > > > so should be used as if(!bitmap_clear_bit) above.
>> > >
>> > > > > + relation_chain **prev = &(m_relations.m_head);
>> > > >
>> > > > s/[()]//
>> > > > thanks,
>> > >
>> > > There seems to be two other spots where a redundant bitmap_bit_p checks
>> > > if we want to bitmap_clear_bit. In dse and ira.
>> > > Like:
>> > > $ cat ~/coccinelle/gcc_bitmap_bit_p-0.cocci ; echo EOF
>> > > // replace redundant bitmap_bit_p() bitmap_clear_bit with the latter
>> > > @ rule1 @
>> > > identifier fn;
>> > > expression bitmap, bit;
>> > > @@
>> > >
>> > > fn(...) {
>> > > <...
>> > > (
>> > > -if (bitmap_bit_p (bitmap, bit))
>> > > +if (bitmap_clear_bit (bitmap, bit))
>> > > {
>> > > ...
>> > > - bitmap_clear_bit (bitmap, bit);
>> > > ...
>> > > }
>> > > |
>> > > -if (bitmap_bit_p (bitmap, bit))
>> > > +if (bitmap_clear_bit (bitmap, bit))
>> > > {
>> > > ...
>> > > }
>> > > ...
>> > > -bitmap_clear_bit (bitmap, bit);
>> > > )
>> > > ...>
>> > > }
>> > > EOF
>> > > $ find gcc/ -type f -a \( -name "*.c" -o -name "*.cc" \) -a \( ! -path
>> > > "gcc/testsuite/*" -a ! -path "gcc/contrib/*" \) -exec spatch -sp_file
>> > > ~/coccinelle/gcc_bitmap_bit_p-0.cocci --show-diff {} \;
>> > > diff =
>> > > --- gcc/dse.c
>> > > +++ /tmp/cocci-output-1104419-443759-dse.c
>> > > @@ -3238,9 +3238,8 @@ mark_reachable_blocks (sbitmap unreachab
>> > > edge e;
>> > > edge_iterator ei;
>> > >
>> > > - if (bitmap_bit_p (unreachable_blocks, bb->index))
>> > > + if (bitmap_clear_bit(unreachable_blocks, bb->index))
>> > > {
>> > > - bitmap_clear_bit (unreachable_blocks, bb->index);
>> > > FOR_EACH_EDGE (e, ei, bb->preds)
>> > > {
>> > > mark_reachable_blocks (unreachable_blocks, e->src);
>> > > diff =
>> > > --- gcc/ira.c
>> > > +++ /tmp/cocci-output-1104678-d8679a-ira.c
>> > > @@ -2944,17 +2944,15 @@ mark_elimination (int from, int to)
>> > > FOR_EACH_BB_FN (bb, cfun)
>> > > {
>> > > r = DF_LR_IN (bb);
>> > > - if (bitmap_bit_p (r, from))
>> > > + if (bitmap_clear_bit(r, from))
>> > > {
>> > > - bitmap_clear_bit (r, from);
>> > > bitmap_set_bit (r, to);
>> > > }
>> > > if (! df_live)
>> > > continue;
>> > > r = DF_LIVE_IN (bb);
>> > > - if (bitmap_bit_p (r, from))
>> > > + if (bitmap_clear_bit(r, from))
>> > > {
>> > > - bitmap_clear_bit (r, from);
>> > > bitmap_set_bit (r, to);
>> > > }
>> > > }
>> > > # in ira.c one would have to fixup the curly braces manually
>> > > PS: coccinelle seems to ruin the spaces before braces in the '+' even
>> > > though i have written them correctly according to GNU style..
>> > >
>> >
>>
