[Bug rtl-optimization/55177] missed optimizations with __builtin_bswap

2013-03-08 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55177 --- Comment #11 from Eric Botcazou 2013-03-09 00:05:46 UTC --- > Eric, > I have some patches to improve __builtin_bswap* that I can line up for 4.9. > Do you mind if I take this bug? They are located on the pinskia/bytewiseunop > bran

[Bug rtl-optimization/55177] missed optimizations with __builtin_bswap

2013-03-08 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55177 --- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski 2013-03-08 15:18:35 UTC --- Eric, I have some patches to improve __builtin_bswap* that I can line up for 4.9. Do you mind if I take this bug? They are located on the pinskia/bytewiseunop branch in gi

[Bug rtl-optimization/55177] missed optimizations with __builtin_bswap

2013-03-08 Thread dwmw2 at infradead dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55177 --- Comment #9 from David Woodhouse 2013-03-08 12:11:24 UTC --- This is now enabled in the Linux kernel. Core patch: http://git.kernel.org/linus/cf66bb93 (in v3.8 but does nothing there) x86:http://git.kernel.org/linus/83a57a4d

[Bug rtl-optimization/55177] missed optimizations with __builtin_bswap

2012-11-08 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55177 --- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou 2012-11-08 16:14:23 UTC --- > I think I have the GCC version checks right there, for the availability of the > builtins? That is, __builtin_bswap32() and __builtin_bswap64() since GCC 4.4, > and __builtin_

[Bug rtl-optimization/55177] missed optimizations with __builtin_bswap

2012-11-08 Thread dwmw2 at infradead dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55177 --- Comment #7 from David Woodhouse 2012-11-08 14:29:37 UTC --- Linux kernel patch to use the builtins at http://marc.info/?l=linux-arch&m=135212414925921&w=2 I think I have the GCC version checks right there, for the availability of the

[Bug rtl-optimization/55177] missed optimizations with __builtin_bswap

2012-11-02 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55177 --- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou 2012-11-02 21:59:27 UTC --- > So what you describe as 'really dumb' is actually something that we *force* > people to do. We'd be much worse off without it. 'really dumb' applied only to the example thou

[Bug rtl-optimization/55177] missed optimizations with __builtin_bswap

2012-11-02 Thread dwmw2 at infradead dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55177 --- Comment #5 from David Woodhouse 2012-11-02 19:41:28 UTC --- Indeed. Bear in mind that sometimes we *hide* the actual variable (by prefixing its name or putting it in a small struct of its own), just to *force* people to use the appropriate b

[Bug rtl-optimization/55177] missed optimizations with __builtin_bswap

2012-11-02 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55177 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|unas

[Bug rtl-optimization/55177] missed optimizations with __builtin_bswap

2012-11-02 Thread dwmw2 at infradead dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55177 --- Comment #3 from David Woodhouse 2012-11-02 17:05:03 UTC --- The first example isn't *that* dumb, as a cut-down test case of real code which may look more complex in reality. If the real code really *is* as simple as my test case, you

[Bug rtl-optimization/55177] missed optimizations with __builtin_bswap

2012-11-02 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55177 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|