Sorry for the slow response.
Thanks for getting back to me. I was pretty sure I didn't have this all
quite right yet.
asm ("" : "=m" (*x), "=r" (y));
you have to assume that the address in %0 might use the same register as %1
Ok, now I'm getting there. It helps that I've compiled s
Hello everyone,
I'm thinking of the right way of adding some loop related pragmas to GCC.
An example:
#pragma loop unroll = 2
for (i = 0; i < n; i ++)
{
Whatever...
}
Here I want the unroll factor of the loop to be 2 when doing RTL loop
unrolling.
B
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Yangfei (Felix) wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> I'm thinking of the right way of adding some loop related pragmas to GCC.
> An example:
>
> #pragma loop unroll = 2
> for (i = 0; i < n; i ++)
> {
> Whatever...
> }
>
> Here I want
Hi,
1. Maybe there is also an opportunity to improve the design of Graphite
code generation, this will give you another benefit - code more robust, easier
to maintain and extend.
I suggest a design where the code generation from ISL AST is based
on attributes (properties) of the ISL AST nodes.
On 03/24/2014 02:08 PM, Mircea Namolaru wrote:
Hi,
1. Maybe there is also an opportunity to improve the design of Graphite
code generation, this will give you another benefit - code more robust, easier
to maintain and extend.
I suggest a design where the code generation from ISL AST is based
on
Hello,
I've been solving undefined symbols related to:
http://gcc.gnu.org/PR57703. In chromium there's a following inline asm:
asm(".type Syscall, @function\n" ...);
intptr_t SandboxSyscall(...)
{
asm volatile("call SyscallAsm");
}
Where call of SandboxSyscall is inlined in couple of fu
Hello,
The General Optimizer Improvements for GCC-4.9 states that function
bodies
are now loaded on-demand and released early improving overall memory
usage
at link time.
Even on searching for the implementation of this feature in the source
code, I was unable to find where this has been imple
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 6:26 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
>
>I've been solving undefined symbols related to:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/PR57703. In chromium there's a following inline asm:
>
> asm(".type Syscall, @function\n" ...);
>
> intptr_t SandboxSyscall(...)
> {
>asm volatile("call SyscallAsm")
On 24/03/14 04:44, Jeff Law wrote:
On 03/22/14 05:29, Richard Hulme wrote:
On 22/03/14 01:47, Jeff Law wrote:
On 03/21/14 18:35, DJ Delorie wrote:
I've found that "removing uneeded moves through registers" is
something gcc does poorly in the post-reload optimizers. I've written
my own on som
> Look at how we implement #pragma ivdep (see replace_loop_annotate ()
> and fortran/trans-stmt.c where it builds ANNOTATE_EXPR).
Note that the C and C++ front-ends also support it.
We are planning to submit a patch to add more loop pragmas as soon as stage #1
opens, so the design could as well b
Richard Sandiford writes:
> Matthew Fortune writes:
> > Maciej W. Rozycki writes:
> >> On Sat, 22 Mar 2014, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> >>
> >> > > Thanks Joseph. I guess I'm not really pushing to have don't-care
> >> > > supported as it would take a lot of effort to determine when code
> >> > >
On Mon, 24 Mar 2014, Matthew Fortune wrote:
> Yes this is a lot simpler than the 3rd mode but disabling the NAN2008 ELF
> Flag checks is even more honest as that is what would happen at the
> kernel-userland boundary anyway, so why enforce it elsewhere.
>
> I know I am pushing hard on this topic
Hi Richard,
Thank you for the suggestion. I see that your patch is merged into trunk.
But I am still not sure that if we can pass "ivdep" to RTL. Can you shed
light on this please ?
For me, I want to do something on RTL with the loop pragma information.
Cheers,
Fei.
>
> On Mon,
13 matches
Mail list logo
