Trevor Saunders writes:
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 09:53:31PM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> I have a series of patches to convert all non-optab instructions to
>> the target-insns.def interface. config-list.mk showed up one problem
>> though. The pa indirect_jump pattern is:
>>
>> ;;; Hope
On Sun, Jul 05, 2015 at 09:11:23AM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Trevor Saunders writes:
> > On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 09:53:31PM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> >> I have a series of patches to convert all non-optab instructions to
> >> the target-insns.def interface. config-list.mk showed u
All:
I am wondering allocation of hot data structure closer to the top of the stack
increases the performance of the application.
The data structure are identified as hot and cold data structure and all the
data structures are sorted in decreasing order of
The hotness and the hot data structure
All:
The scalar and array reduction patterns can be identified if the result of
commutative updates
Is applied to the same scalar or array variables on the LHS with +, *, Min or
Max. Thus the reduction pattern identified with
the commutative update help in vectorization or parallelization.
Fo
On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 3:45 PM, Ajit Kumar Agarwal wrote:
> I am not sure why the above optimization is not implemented in GCC.
-fsplit-ivs-in-unroller
Ciao!
Steven
Snapshot gcc-6-20150705 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/6-20150705/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 6 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk revision
On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 6:02 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 3:45 PM, Ajit Kumar Agarwal wrote:
>> I am not sure why the above optimization is not implemented in GCC.
>
> -fsplit-ivs-in-unroller
And thing might have changed. Given the condition GCC does IVO on
gimple, unrollin
-Original Message-
From: Bin.Cheng [mailto:amker.ch...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, July 06, 2015 7:04 AM
To: Steven Bosscher
Cc: Ajit Kumar Agarwal; l...@redhat.com; Richard Biener; gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Vinod
Kathail; Shail Aditya Gupta; Vidhumouli Hunsigida; Nagaraju Mekala
Subject: Re: Live
On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 12:02 PM, Ajit Kumar Agarwal
wrote:
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Bin.Cheng [mailto:amker.ch...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 06, 2015 7:04 AM
> To: Steven Bosscher
> Cc: Ajit Kumar Agarwal; l...@redhat.com; Richard Biener; gcc@gcc.gnu.org;
> Vinod Kathail; Sha
-Original Message-
From: Bin.Cheng [mailto:amker.ch...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, July 06, 2015 10:26 AM
To: Ajit Kumar Agarwal
Cc: Steven Bosscher; l...@redhat.com; Richard Biener; gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Vinod
Kathail; Shail Aditya Gupta; Vidhumouli Hunsigida; Nagaraju Mekala
Subject: Re: Live
On Friday 03 July 2015 07:15 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Vineet Gupta
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have the following test case (reduced from Linux kernel sources) and it
>> seems
>> gcc is optimizing away the first loop iteration.
>>
>> arc-linux-gcc -c -O2 star-90008
On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Ajit Kumar Agarwal
wrote:
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Bin.Cheng [mailto:amker.ch...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 06, 2015 10:26 AM
> To: Ajit Kumar Agarwal
> Cc: Steven Bosscher; l...@redhat.com; Richard Biener; gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Vinod
> Kathail; Sha
On Mon, 6 Jul 2015, Vineet Gupta wrote:
It is the C language standard that says that shifts like this invoke
undefined behavior.
Right, but the compiler is a program nevertheless and it knows what to do when
it
sees 1 << 62
It's not like there is an uninitialized variable or something which w
On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 7:30 AM, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> On Friday 03 July 2015 07:15 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Vineet Gupta
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I have the following test case (reduced from Linux kernel sources) and it
>>> seems
>>> gcc is optimizing away t
14 matches
Mail list logo
