> Thanks. Another question I have is that, in this case, will the
following
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Sign_Extension_Removal
>
> help in removal of the sign / zero extension ?
First, it seems to me that in your case:
(1) a = a | 1 /* a |= 1 */
(2) a = a | 1 /* a |= 1 */
the expressions "a | 1
> Thanks. Another question I have is that, in this case, will the
following
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Sign_Extension_Removal
>
> help in removal of the sign / zero extension ?
First, it seems to me that in your case:
(1) a = a | 1 /* a |= 1 */
(2) a = a | 1 /* a |= 1 */
the expressions "a | 1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Kenner) wrote on 17/01/2007 18:04:20:
> > First, it seems to me that in your case:
> >
> > (1) a = a | 1 /* a |= 1 */
> > (2) a = a | 1 /* a |= 1 */
> >
> > the expressions "a | 1" in (1) and (2) are different as the "a"
> > is not the same. So there is nothing to do f
still there are a lot of things that
show you
how to work with isl ast and may considerably help you.
Mircea
- Original Message -
> From: "Roman Gareev"
> To: "Mircea Namolaru" , "Tobias Grosser"
>
> Cc: "Albert Cohen" , gcc@gcc.gn
The patches for SEE have been committed today.
The minor style corrections requested by you in the
final review approval will be in a follow-up patch
to be submitted the next week.
Mircea
> That certainly does suggest a bug in the SEE patches. They needn't do
> anything useful on IA32/AMD64, but they should presumably either (a) not
> cause a bootstrap failure on these architectures, or (b) be disabled on
> these architectures.
Agree. I will check the bootstrapping on x86. (a) see
> Given that this is more than a bootstrap problem with non-default flags,
> but testsuite regressions for gfortran and SPEC failures on a primary
> platform, I think this falls under GCC's 48 hour rule. This simply
> formalizes your phrase "short time frame" above, and means that it
you're
> unl
Committed according to
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-05/msg00185.html
Mircea
2006-05-07 Mircea Namolaru <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* opts.c (flag_see): remove its setting at -O3.
Index: opts.c
===
--- opts.c (re
> @item -fsee
> @opindex fsee
> Eliminates redundant extension instructions and move the non redundant
> ones to optimal placement using LCM.
> Enabled at level @option{-O3}.
>
> Would you mind adjusting this as well
Thanks. I've updated doc/invoke.texi correspondingly. Mircea
the ISL AST (with
possible addition of
new attributes/transformations) ?
Regards, Mircea
- Original Message -
> From: "Roman Gareev"
> To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: "Tobias Grosser" , "Albert Cohen"
> , "Mircea Namolaru"
>
> Sent: F
essage -
> From: "Tobias Grosser"
> To: "Roman Gareev"
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, "Albert Cohen" , "Mircea
> Namolaru"
> Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 12:51:26 PM
> Subject: Re: Integration of ISL code generator into Graphite
>
> On 03/21/2
time)
Mircea
- Original Message -
> From: "Tobias Grosser"
> To: "Mircea Namolaru" , "Roman Gareev"
>
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, "Albert Cohen"
> Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 2:11:49 PM
> Subject: Re: Integration of ISL code g
> As for C++, I think we need more OO language specific
> optimizations. I don't know what the status of
> devirtualizion which was reported on the previous
> summit.
Sorry for the late replay.
The devirtualization is on hold. Currently GCC is lacking the necessary
infrastructure needed by C
13 matches
Mail list logo
