http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43902
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
--- Comment #14 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-29 13:44 ---
Subject: Bug 43902
Author: bernds
Date: Tue Jun 29 13:43:57 2010
New Revision: 161533
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=161533
Log:
PR target/43902
* config/arm/arm.md (maddsidi4
--- Comment #13 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-25 08:56 ---
Subject: Bug 43902
Author: bernds
Date: Fri Jun 25 08:56:24 2010
New Revision: 161366
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=161366
Log:
With large parts from Jim Wilson:
PR target/43
--- Comment #12 from wilson at codesourcery dot com 2010-06-17 04:29
---
Subject: Re: suboptimal MIPS widening multiply accumulate
On Wed, 2010-06-16 at 13:29 +, bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> Could you retest the MIPS fixed-point testcases with the obvious fix? You
> pro
--- Comment #11 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-16 13:29 ---
Yes, the check for MULT is for cases where the definition is after the use in
basic-block order; I'd expect this can happen with crazy gotos and maybe in
other cases as well.
Could you retest the MIPS fixed-point te
--- Comment #10 from wilson at codesourcery dot com 2010-06-16 06:30
---
Subject: Re: suboptimal MIPS widening multiply accumulate
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 20:21 +, bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> What do you think? Please let me know what your MIPS tests turned up.
I'm look
--- Comment #9 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-09 20:20 ---
Created an attachment (id=20880)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20880&action=view)
A new version of Jim's patch
Here's what I've done with it so far. I've changed the new tree code to be a
prope
--- Comment #8 from wilson at codesourcery dot com 2010-06-07 22:18 ---
Subject: Re: suboptimal MIPS widening multiply accumulate
On Mon, 2010-06-07 at 21:34 +, bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> Jim, are you still working on this or should I pick it up?
I'm working on it, but
--- Comment #7 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-07 21:34 ---
Jim, are you still working on this or should I pick it up?
--
bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-25 06:35 ---
Created an attachment (id=20739)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20739&action=view)
second patch attempt, modifying widen_mult tree pass
This removes about 100 lines from expr.c, and adds about 90
--- Comment #5 from wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-25 06:30 ---
Richard Guenther suggested using DOT_PROD_EXPR. I ran into several problems
with that.
DOT_PROD_EXPR expands to the sdot_prodM pattern. The mips port is using
maddMN. We essentially have two named patterns that ar
--- Comment #4 from wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-03 22:36 ---
Created an attachment (id=20552)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20552&action=view)
trivial solution for original problem
This fixes the original problem, but does not fix the new breakage caused
--- Comment #3 from wilson at codesourcery dot com 2010-05-03 22:28 ---
Subject: Re: suboptimal MIPS widening multiply accumulate
On Tue, 2010-04-27 at 09:33 +, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> For more general optimization you might want to move all this code to
> the tree
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 09:33 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Some further investigation shows that there is code in expand_expr_real_2 that
> is supposed to be able to generate multiply-accumulate instructions, but it
> isn't general enough. In my g
--- Comment #1 from wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 01:17 ---
Some further investigation shows that there is code in expand_expr_real_2 that
is supposed to be able to generate multiply-accumulate instructions, but it
isn't general enough. In my gimple, I have
D.1999_10 = D.19
15 matches
Mail list logo
