RE: [RFC,PATCH] Using equivalences to help eliminate_regs_in_insn

2016-09-16 Thread Matthew Fortune
Vladimir N Makarov writes: > On 09/06/2016 11:22 AM, Matthew Fortune wrote: > > There is an implementation that optimises a single set but not one for > > a REG_EQUAL. Do you have any recollection of this code and do you > > think there was a reason you didn't implement the REG_EQUAL case? > > Eit

Re: [RFC,PATCH] Using equivalences to help eliminate_regs_in_insn

2016-09-16 Thread Vladimir N Makarov
On 09/06/2016 11:22 AM, Matthew Fortune wrote: There is an implementation that optimises a single set but not one for a REG_EQUAL. Do you have any recollection of this code and do you think there was a reason you didn't implement the REG_EQUAL case? Either way any advice on my approach is welco

[RFC,PATCH] Using equivalences to help eliminate_regs_in_insn

2016-09-06 Thread Matthew Fortune
I've found a case of suboptimal code coming from LRA when we have a large frame and have the frame grow downwards with MIPS. A good testcase for this is the qsort benchmark from the automotive section of mibench[1]. Any frame access where the offset is not supported as an add-immediate should bene