On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 3:13 PM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Uros,
>
> Here is update patch which includes (1) couple changes proposed by
> Richard in tree-vect-loop.c and (2) the changes in back-end proposed
> by you.
>
> Is it OK for trunk?
> Bootstrap and regression testing dis not show any new fa
Uros,
Here is update patch which includes (1) couple changes proposed by
Richard in tree-vect-loop.c and (2) the changes in back-end proposed
by you.
Is it OK for trunk?
Bootstrap and regression testing dis not show any new failures.
ChangeLog:
2016-01-29 Yuri Rumyantsev
PR middle-end/68542
On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Thanks Richard.
>
> Uros,
>
> Could you please review back-end part of this patch?
No problem, but please in future CC me on the x86 patches, so I won't forgot.
+(define_expand "cbranch4"
+ [(set (reg:CC FLAGS_REG)
+(compare:CC (matc
Thanks Richard.
Uros,
Could you please review back-end part of this patch?
Thanks.
Yuri.
2016-01-28 16:26 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener :
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 3:29 PM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
>> Richard,
>>
>> I fixed all remarks pointed by you in vectorizer part of patch. Could
>> you take a l
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 3:29 PM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Richard,
>
> I fixed all remarks pointed by you in vectorizer part of patch. Could
> you take a look on modified patch.
+ if (is_gimple_call (stmt1))
+ lhs = gimple_call_lhs (stmt1);
+ else
+
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 6:29 AM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Richard,
>
> I fixed all remarks pointed by you in vectorizer part of patch. Could
> you take a look on modified patch.
>
> Uros,
>
> Could you please review i386 part of patch related to support of
> conditional branches with vector compar
Richard,
I fixed all remarks pointed by you in vectorizer part of patch. Could
you take a look on modified patch.
Uros,
Could you please review i386 part of patch related to support of
conditional branches with vector comparison.
Bootstrap and regression testing did not show any new failures.
I
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 3:50 PM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Richard,
>
> Here is the second part of patch which really preforms mask stores and
> all statements related to it to new basic block guarded by test on
> zero mask. Hew test is also added.
>
> Is it OK for trunk?
+ /* Pick up all masked
Richard,
Here is the second part of patch which really preforms mask stores and
all statements related to it to new basic block guarded by test on
zero mask. Hew test is also added.
Is it OK for trunk?
Thanks.
Yuri.
2016-01-18 Yuri Rumyantsev
PR middle-end/68542
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_e
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 3:02 PM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Thanks Richard.
>
> I changed the check on type as you proposed.
>
> What about the second back-end part of patch (it has been sent 08.12.15).
Can't see it in my inbox - can you reply to the mail with a ping?
Thanks,
Richard.
> Thanks.
>
Thanks Richard.
I changed the check on type as you proposed.
What about the second back-end part of patch (it has been sent 08.12.15).
Thanks.
Yuri.
2016-01-18 15:44 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener :
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
>> Hi Richard,
>>
>> Did you have anu chan
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> Did you have anu chance to look at updated patch?
diff --git a/gcc/tree-vrp.c b/gcc/tree-vrp.c
index acbb70b..208a752 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-vrp.c
+++ b/gcc/tree-vrp.c
@@ -5771,6 +5771,10 @@ register_edge_assert_for (tree n
Hi Richard,
Did you have anu chance to look at updated patch?
Thanks.
Yuri.
2015-12-18 13:20 GMT+03:00 Yuri Rumyantsev :
> Hi Richard,
>
> Here is updated patch for middle-end part of the whole patch which
> fixes all your remarks I hope.
>
> Regression testing and bootstrapping did not show any
Hi Richard,
Here is updated patch for middle-end part of the whole patch which
fixes all your remarks I hope.
Regression testing and bootstrapping did not show any new failures.
Is it OK for trunk?
Yuri.
ChangeLog:
2015-12-18 Yuri Rumyantsev
PR middle-end/68542
* fold-const.c (fold_binary_o
On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Richard.
> Thanks for your review.
> I re-designed fix for assert by adding additional checks for vector
> comparison with boolean result to fold_binary_op_with_conditional_arg
> and remove early exit to combine_cond_expr_cond.
> Unfortunat
Richard.
Thanks for your review.
I re-designed fix for assert by adding additional checks for vector
comparison with boolean result to fold_binary_op_with_conditional_arg
and remove early exit to combine_cond_expr_cond.
Unfortunately, I am not able to provide you with test-case since it is
in my se
On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Hi Richard.
>
> Thanks a lot for your review.
> Below are my answers.
>
> You asked why I inserted additional check to
> ++ b/gcc/tree-ssa-forwprop.c
> @@ -373,6 +373,11 @@ combine_cond_expr_cond (gimple *stmt, enum
> tree_code code, tree ty
Hi Richard,
Here is the second part of patch.
Is it OK for trunk?
I assume that it should fix huge degradation on 481.wrf for -march=bdver4 also.
ChangeLog:
2015-12-08 Yuri Rumyantsev
PR middle-end/68542
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_expand_branch): Implement integral vector
comparison with bo
Richard!
Here is middle-end part of patch with changes proposed by you.
Is it OK for trunk?
Thanks.
Yuri.
ChangeLog:
2015-12-07 Yuri Rumyantsev
PR middle-end/68542
* fold-const.c (fold_relational_const): Add handling of vector
comparison with boolean result.
* tree-cfg.c (verify_gimple_comp
Hi Richard.
Thanks a lot for your review.
Below are my answers.
You asked why I inserted additional check to
++ b/gcc/tree-ssa-forwprop.c
@@ -373,6 +373,11 @@ combine_cond_expr_cond (gimple *stmt, enum
tree_code code, tree type,
gcc_assert (TREE_CODE_CLASS (code) == tcc_comparison);
+ /* Do
On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Here is a patch for 481.wrf preformance regression for avx2 which is
> sligthly modified mask store optimization. This transformation allows
> perform unpredication for semi-hammock containing masked stores, other
> words if we
Hi All,
Here is a patch for 481.wrf preformance regression for avx2 which is
sligthly modified mask store optimization. This transformation allows
perform unpredication for semi-hammock containing masked stores, other
words if we have a loop like
for (i=0; i
PR middle-end/68542
* config/i386/i386
22 matches
Mail list logo