Hi,
new patterns to implement overflow arithmetics were added recently (addv4,
subv4, mulv4, umulv4, negv3) and they are not documented in the internal
manual as far as I can see. Granted, the old patterns (addv3, subv3, mulv3,
divv3, negv2) are not documented either but they were not very use
On Mon, 9 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> On 4 November 2015 at 20:35, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > Btw, did you investigate code gen differences on x86_64/i586? That
> > target expands all divisions/modulo ops via divmod, relying on CSE
> > solely as the HW always computes both div and
Snapshot gcc-5-20151110 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/5-20151110/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 5 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcc-5
Richard Biener writes:
> On Mon, 9 Nov 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>> c) Gating the divmod transform -
>> I tried gating it on checks for optab_handlers on div and mod, however
>> this doesn't enable transform for arm cortex-a9
>> anymore (cortex-a9 doesn't have hardware instructions for inte
The routines declared as
static bool
is_too_expensive (const char *pass)
in both cprop.c and gcse.c are identical except for two comment lines.
I'd like to modify is_too_expensive, which implied to me that there
should be only one copy of the routine.
Would it be reasonable to add an extern
On 11/10/2015 07:46 PM, Bradley Lucier wrote:
The routines declared as
static bool
is_too_expensive (const char *pass)
in both cprop.c and gcse.c are identical except for two comment lines.
I'd like to modify is_too_expensive, which implied to me that there
should be only one copy of the routi
