On October 22, 2014 5:08:50 PM CEST, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 04:20:09PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
>> 2014-10-22 Richard Biener
>>
>> * genmatch.c (count_captures): New function.
>> (dt_simplify::gen): Handle preserving side-effects for
>> GENERIC code ge
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 04:20:09PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> 2014-10-22 Richard Biener
>
> * genmatch.c (count_captures): New function.
> (dt_simplify::gen): Handle preserving side-effects for
> GENERIC code generation.
> (decision_tree::gen_generic): Do not reject
On Wed, 22 Oct 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> The following auto-handles preserving of side-effects properly
> for GENERIC simplification instead of simply rejecting operands
> with side-effects. Cases we cannot handle correctly are still
> handled that way.
>
> For example for
>
> /* (x | CS
On Fri, 17 Oct 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Oct 2014, Jeff Law wrote:
>
> > On 10/16/14 05:06, Richard Biener wrote:
> > >
> > > This patch (also applicable to trunk) makes us canoncialize operand
> > > order for comparisons at the same time we canonicalize other
> > > operand order,
On Thu, 16 Oct 2014, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 10/16/14 05:06, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > This patch (also applicable to trunk) makes us canoncialize operand
> > order for comparisons at the same time we canonicalize other
> > operand order, in particular before dispatching to generic_simplify.
> >
On 10/16/14 05:06, Richard Biener wrote:
This patch (also applicable to trunk) makes us canoncialize operand
order for comparisons at the same time we canonicalize other
operand order, in particular before dispatching to generic_simplify.
It also adds operand canonicalization to ternary ops and
On Tue, 14 Oct 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Oct 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> >
> > This changes default behavior of fold_stmt back to _not_ following
> > SSA use-def chains when trying to simplify things. I had to force
> > that already for one caller and for the merge to trunk I
On Tue, 14 Oct 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> This changes default behavior of fold_stmt back to _not_ following
> SSA use-def chains when trying to simplify things. I had to force
> that already for one caller and for the merge to trunk I'd rather
> not track down issues in every other existin
On 09/26/2014 06:54 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
It also uncovers that the C++ FE uses a mix of NOP_EXPR and
CONVERT_EXPR both when building expressions and when checking
for them. Jason - is there any difference between NOP_EXPR and
CONVERT_EXPR as far as the C++ FE is concerned?
There are a few
On Tue, 16 Sep 2014, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Sep 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > The following adds the ability to write predicates using patterns
> > with an example following negate_expr_p which already has a
> > use in comparison folding (via its if c-expr).
> >
> > The syntax is as
On Tue, 16 Sep 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
The following adds the ability to write predicates using patterns
with an example following negate_expr_p which already has a
use in comparison folding (via its if c-expr).
The syntax is as follows:
(match negate_expr_p
INTEGER_CST
(if (TYPE_OVERFLOW_
On Fri, 12 Sep 2014, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Sep 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > +/* x ^ ~0 -> ~x */
> > (simplify
> > (bit_and @0 integer_all_onesp)
> > @0)
>
> The comment doesn't seem to match.
Thanks - fixed below which also implements simplify_mult and
simplify_not_neg_expr.
On Fri, 12 Sep 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
+/* x ^ ~0 -> ~x */
(simplify
(bit_and @0 integer_all_onesp)
@0)
The comment doesn't seem to match.
--
Marc Glisse
On Thu, 11 Sep 2014, Marc Glisse wrote:
> /* ~A + 1 -> -A */
> (simplify
>(plus (bit_not @0) integer_onep@1)
>(if (TREE_CODE (TREE_TYPE (@1)) != COMPLEX_TYPE
> || (TREE_CODE (@1) == COMPLEX_CST
> && integer_onep (TREE_REALPART (@1))
> && integer_onep (TR
/* ~A + 1 -> -A */
(simplify
(plus (bit_not @0) integer_onep@1)
(if (TREE_CODE (TREE_TYPE (@1)) != COMPLEX_TYPE
|| (TREE_CODE (@1) == COMPLEX_CST
&& integer_onep (TREE_REALPART (@1))
&& integer_onep (TREE_IMAGPART (@1
(negate @0)))
the complex par
On Thu, 11 Sep 2014, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Sep 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > + /* We can't reassociate floating-point or fixed-point plus or minus
> > +because of saturation to +-Inf. */
> > + (if (!FLOAT_TYPE_P (type) && !FIXED_POINT_TYPE_P (type))
>
> Do you remember if ther
On Thu, 11 Sep 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
+ /* We can't reassociate floating-point or fixed-point plus or minus
+because of saturation to +-Inf. */
+ (if (!FLOAT_TYPE_P (type) && !FIXED_POINT_TYPE_P (type))
Do you remember if there was a particular reason not to add
|| flag_associative
On Thu, 21 Aug 2014, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Aug 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > 2014-08-21 Richard Biener
> >
> > * match.pd ((T1)(~(T2) X) -> ~(T1) X): Paste all comment
> > from fold-const.c, fix simplification result.
> >
> > Index: gcc/match.pd
> >
On Thu, 21 Aug 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
2014-08-21 Richard Biener
* match.pd ((T1)(~(T2) X) -> ~(T1) X): Paste all comment
from fold-const.c, fix simplification result.
Index: gcc/match.pd
===
--- gcc/match.p
On Thu, 21 Aug 2014, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Aug 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > +/* From fold_unary. */
> > +
> > +/* (T1)(~(T2) X) -> ~(T1) X */
> > +(simplify
> > + (convert (bit_not@0 (convert @1)))
> > + (if (INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (type)
> > + && INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (@0))
>
On Thu, 21 Aug 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
+/* From fold_unary. */
+
+/* (T1)(~(T2) X) -> ~(T1) X */
+(simplify
+ (convert (bit_not@0 (convert @1)))
+ (if (INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (type)
+ && INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (@0))
+ && TYPE_PRECISION (type) == TYPE_PRECISION (TREE_TYPE (@0))
+
On Wed, 20 Aug 2014, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Aug 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 20 Aug 2014, Marc Glisse wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, 20 Aug 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
> > >
> > > > Committed.
> > > >
> > > > Also makes visible a desirable change I plan for if-exprs. They
> >
On Wed, 20 Aug 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, 20 Aug 2014, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Wed, 20 Aug 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
Committed.
Also makes visible a desirable change I plan for if-exprs. They
should behave like outer ifs and allow us to write that series
of pattern as
(for op in
On Wed, 20 Aug 2014, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Aug 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > Committed.
> >
> > Also makes visible a desirable change I plan for if-exprs. They
> > should behave like outer ifs and allow us to write that series
> > of pattern as
> >
> > (for op in eq ne
> > /* Si
On Wed, 20 Aug 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
Committed.
Also makes visible a desirable change I plan for if-exprs. They
should behave like outer ifs and allow us to write that series
of pattern as
(for op in eq ne
/* Simplify X * C1 CMP 0 to X CMP 0 if C1 is not zero. */
(simplify
(op (mu
On Tue, 12 Aug 2014, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 12:15:20PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > @@ -2422,6 +2441,7 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
> >add_operator (SYM, # SYM, # TYPE, NARGS);
> > #define END_OF_BASE_TREE_CODES
> > #include "tree.def"
> > +add_operator (CONVERT
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 12:15:20PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> @@ -2422,6 +2441,7 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
>add_operator (SYM, # SYM, # TYPE, NARGS);
> #define END_OF_BASE_TREE_CODES
> #include "tree.def"
> +add_operator (CONVERT1, "CONVERT0", "tcc_unary", 1);
Pasto? Shouldn't that
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> $subject, applied.
Err, too fast. Fixed.
Richard.
2014-08-06 Richard Biener
* gimple-match-head.c (gimple_simplify): Fix implementation.
Index: gcc/gimple-match-head.c
==
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> The following fixes the remaining ICEs I see when testing all
> languages (but ada and go).
>
> The tree-cfg.c hunk highlights one change in the behavior
> of fold_stmt, namely that it now follows SSA edges by default.
> Maybe that's undesired? On a
On Tue, 24 Jun 2014, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 9:00 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > This massages things so GENERIC code-gen works (well, is emitted
> > and compiles). The GENERIC interface matches that of
> > fold_{unary,binary,ternary} with also supporting calls he
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 9:00 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> This massages things so GENERIC code-gen works (well, is emitted
> and compiles). The GENERIC interface matches that of
> fold_{unary,binary,ternary} with also supporting calls here.
> It's supposed to be called at the start of those func
On Thu, 5 Jun 2014, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> On 05/06/14 14:25, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > The following makes genmatch annotate gimple-match.c with (commented
> > for now) line directives, similar to other generator programs.
> > This should help associating generated code with parts in matc
On 05/06/14 14:25, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> The following makes genmatch annotate gimple-match.c with (commented
> for now) line directives, similar to other generator programs.
> This should help associating generated code with parts in match.pd.
>
I've often found these annotations more of a
On Tue, 3 Jun 2014, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Jun 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2 Jun 2014, Marc Glisse wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > >(plus (bit_not @0) @0)
> > > >if (INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (@0)))
> > > >{ build_int_cst (TREE_TYPE (@0), -1); })
> > > > +(match_and_si
On Tue, 3 Jun 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, 2 Jun 2014, Marc Glisse wrote:
(plus (bit_not @0) @0)
if (INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (@0)))
{ build_int_cst (TREE_TYPE (@0), -1); })
+(match_and_simplify
+ (plus @0 (bit_not @0))
+ if (INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (@0)))
+ { build_i
On Mon, 2 Jun 2014, Marc Glisse wrote:
>
> >(plus (bit_not @0) @0)
> >if (INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (@0)))
> >{ build_int_cst (TREE_TYPE (@0), -1); })
> > +(match_and_simplify
> > + (plus @0 (bit_not @0))
> > + if (INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (@0)))
> > + { build_int_cst (TREE_TYPE
(plus (bit_not @0) @0)
if (INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (@0)))
{ build_int_cst (TREE_TYPE (@0), -1); })
+(match_and_simplify
+ (plus @0 (bit_not @0))
+ if (INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (@0)))
+ { build_int_cst (TREE_TYPE (@0), -1); })
Why not just:
(match_and_simplify
(plus @0 (bit_
37 matches
Mail list logo
