On 30/03/15 08:14, Bin.Cheng wrote:
On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 1:31 AM, Sandra Loosemore
wrote:
On 03/27/2015 03:43 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 27/03/15 03:29, Bin.Cheng wrote:
[much snippage]
As for tree ivopts, address cost is used in both ways. For any
address computation that's invalid
On 30/03/15 08:07, Bin.Cheng wrote:
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 5:43 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 27/03/15 03:29, Bin.Cheng wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 11:40 PM, Kyrill Tkachov
wrote:
Hi all,
I'd like to attempt to make GCC's usage of costs in the backends
consistent.
We have a lot of diffe
On 27/03/15 17:31, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
On 03/27/2015 03:43 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 27/03/15 03:29, Bin.Cheng wrote:
[much snippage]
As for tree ivopts, address cost is used in both ways. For any
address computation that's invalid, it tries to legitimize it into two
parts, the first
On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 1:31 AM, Sandra Loosemore
wrote:
> On 03/27/2015 03:43 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 27/03/15 03:29, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>>>
>>> [much snippage]
>>>
>>>
>>> As for tree ivopts, address cost is used in both ways. For any
>>> address computation that's invalid, it tries
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 5:43 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>
> On 27/03/15 03:29, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 11:40 PM, Kyrill Tkachov
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I'd like to attempt to make GCC's usage of costs in the backends
>>> consistent.
>>> We have a lot of different t
On 03/27/2015 03:43 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 27/03/15 03:29, Bin.Cheng wrote:
[much snippage]
As for tree ivopts, address cost is used in both ways. For any
address computation that's invalid, it tries to legitimize it into two
parts, the first part results in alu instructions, the second
On 27/03/15 03:29, Bin.Cheng wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 11:40 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Hi all,
I'd like to attempt to make GCC's usage of costs in the backends consistent.
We have a lot of different types: rtx costs, address costs, regmove costs,
vector costs etc. Some of them are use in
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 11:40 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to attempt to make GCC's usage of costs in the backends consistent.
> We have a lot of different types: rtx costs, address costs, regmove costs,
> vector costs etc. Some of them are use in different units, compared agai
Hi all,
I'd like to attempt to make GCC's usage of costs in the backends consistent.
We have a lot of different types: rtx costs, address costs, regmove costs,
vector costs etc. Some of them are use in different units, compared against
different types of costs and in general are a bit of a mess.
