On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 11:33 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> OTOH, x86_64 and i686 targets can also benefit from this change. If
>>> combine can't create more complex address (covered by lea), then it
>>> will simply propagate memory operand back into the add insn. It looks
>>> to me that
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 11:58 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 11:51 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 8:37 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>
>> OTOH, x86_64 and i686 targets can also benefit from this change. If
>> combine can't create more complex address (covered by lea),
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 11:51 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 8:37 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> OTOH, x86_64 and i686 targets can also benefit from this change. If
> combine can't create more complex address (covered by lea), then it
> will simply propagate memory operand bac
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 8:37 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
OTOH, x86_64 and i686 targets can also benefit from this change. If
combine can't create more complex address (covered by lea), then it
will simply propagate memory operand back into the add insn. It looks
to me that we can't loos
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 10:32 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 6:06 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
>>> OTOH, x86_64 and i686 targets can also benefit from this change. If
>>> combine can't create more complex address (covered by lea), then it
>>> will simply propagate memory operand back into
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 6:06 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> OTOH, x86_64 and i686 targets can also benefit from this change. If
>> combine can't create more complex address (covered by lea), then it
>> will simply propagate memory operand back into the add insn. It looks
>> to me that we can't loose here,
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 1:19 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
This patch improves address combine for x32 by forcing the memory memory
operand of PLUS operation into register. Tested on Linux/x86-64 with
-mx32. OK for trunk?
>>>
>>> Does
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 1:19 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
This patch improves address combine for x32 by forcing the memory memory
operand of PLUS operation into register. Tested on Linux/x86-64 with
-mx32. OK for trunk?
>>>
>>> Does
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>> This patch improves address combine for x32 by forcing the memory memory
>>> operand of PLUS operation into register. Tested on Linux/x86-64 with
>>> -mx32. OK for trunk?
>>
>> Does the patch fix
>>
>> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr45670.c scan-a
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 1:00 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> This patch improves address combine for x32 by forcing the memory memory
>> operand of PLUS operation into register. Tested on Linux/x86-64 with
>> -mx32. OK for trunk?
>
> Does the patch fix
On 10/04/2011 01:00 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
+ else
+{
+ /* Improve address combine in x32 mode. */
+ if (TARGET_X32
+ && code == PLUS
+ && !MEM_P (dst)
+ && !MEM_P (src1)
+ && MEM_P (src2) )
+ src2 = force_reg (mode, src2);
+}
Perhaps this is wor
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 1:00 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> This patch improves address combine for x32 by forcing the memory memory
> operand of PLUS operation into register. Tested on Linux/x86-64 with
> -mx32. OK for trunk?
Does the patch fix
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr45670.c scan-assembler-not lea[lq]
This patch improves address combine for x32 by forcing the memory memory
operand of PLUS operation into register. Tested on Linux/x86-64 with
-mx32. OK for trunk?
Thanks.
H.J.
---
2011-10-03 H.J. Lu
PR target/50603
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_fixup_binary_operands): Force th
13 matches
Mail list logo
