https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #41 from Yvan Roux ---
Author: yroux
Date: Wed Jan 14 10:22:48 2015
New Revision: 219584
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=219584&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
2015-01-14 Yvan Roux
Backport from trunk r218451.
2014-12-06
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
Sebastian Pop changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #39 from Sebastian Pop ---
Author: spop
Date: Sat Dec 6 19:19:37 2014
New Revision: 218451
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=218451&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
extend jump thread for finite state automata
PR tree-optimization/547
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #38 from Steve Ellcey ---
FYI: I am testing a new patch for this that adds a new pass to do this
optimization. See https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-08/msg01228.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
Sebastian Pop changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||spop at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #37
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #36 from Joey Ye ---
Please ignore previous comment as it shouldn't be here.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #35 from Joey Ye ---
Here is good expansion:
;; _41 = _42 * 4;
(insn 20 19 0 (set (reg:SI 126 [ D.5038 ])
(ashift:SI (reg/v:SI 131 [ Int_1_Par_Val ])
(const_int 2 [0x2]))) -1
(nil))
;; _40 = _2 + _41;
(insn
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #34 from Igor Zamyatin ---
Done - http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59597
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #33 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Igor Zamyatin from comment #31)
> The problem is that there is a performance regression on i686 for Coremark
> test
If you can reproduce a testcase please file a new bug for this issue.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #32 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Without a testcase that is representative of the issue, there's nothing I can
do.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #31 from Igor Zamyatin ---
The problem is that there is a performance regression on i686 for Coremark test
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #30 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Not at the moment. Focus is on bugfixing for 4.9, particularly regressions.
This doesn't qualify.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
Igor Zamyatin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
jgreenhalgh at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resoluti
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
jgreenhalgh at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jgreenhalgh at gcc dot gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #25 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #24 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #23 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #19 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #21 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #20 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #22 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #17 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #18 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #15 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #16 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #14 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #11 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #13 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #12 from StaffLeavers at arm dot com ---
greta.yorsh no longer works for ARM.
Your email will be forwarded to their line manager.
Please do not reply to this email.
If you need more information, please email real-postmas...@arm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #10 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
So I've got the base infrastructure in the jump threader to perform this
optimization. The outstanding issues specific to the coremark optimization:
1. GCC now preserves loop nest information. This opti
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #9 from Steve Ellcey 2013-05-02 00:11:52
UTC ---
See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2013-05/msg9.html for a dynamically loadable
pass to do this optimization. It is not a finished product but it seems to
work for coremark.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #8 from Joey Ye 2013-03-08 03:56:38 UTC ---
// A none loop case shows how minor changes impacts current jump thread
behavior
int foo(int state, int check)
{
switch (state) {
case 0:
state = 1;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #6 from Venkataramanan
2013-03-04 08:34:06 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> int first;
> void thread_backedge (void)
> {
> int i = 0;
>
> do
> {
> if (first ==1)
> {
> foo ();
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
Venkataramanan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||venkataramanan.kumar at amd
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #3 from Joey Ye 2012-10-10 07:37:15 UTC ---
Current jump-threading is too conservative to thread this case. Following
limits are what I observed by reading code:
1. It only thread around blocks that
* Single entry
* Multip
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2012-10-01
10:19:14 UTC ---
This is just (iterated) jump-threading I believe.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
--- Comment
42 matches
Mail list logo
