On February 8, 2016 7:07:46 PM GMT+01:00, Vladimir Makarov
wrote:
>On 02/08/2016 12:38 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
>>
>> I think the patch makes perfect sense. ira_setup_alts should have no
>> observable behaviour from the outside, except the returned value of
>merged
>> acceptable alternatives. Ce
On 02/08/2016 12:38 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
I think the patch makes perfect sense. ira_setup_alts should have no
observable behaviour from the outside, except the returned value of merged
acceptable alternatives. Certainly it has no business to fiddle with
recog_data. It only does the swappin
Hi,
On Mon, 8 Feb 2016, Richard Biener wrote:
> 429.mcf 9120243 37.6 S9120245 37.3 S
> 429.mcf 9120224 40.7 S9120241 37.8 *
> 429.mcf 9120225 40.5 *9120229 39.9 S
> 471.omne
On 02/08/2016 04:09 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
With all of the above I'm not sure what to do for GCC 6 (even though
you just approved the patch). Going with the patch alternative (just
revert swapping parts of the commutative operands) looks like
completely bogus though it works for fixing the r
On 02/08/2016 10:09 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
The gcc.target/i386/addr-sel-1.c (for PR28940) seems to just started
working at some point past in time and thus it was added and the
bug closed. You could say RA does a better job after the patch
as it uses 1 less register but that restricts the fol
On Fri, 5 Feb 2016, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
> On 02/05/2016 04:25 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > The following patch fixes the performance regression for 435.gromacs
> > on x86_64 with AVX2 (Haswell or bdver2) caused by
> >
> > 2015-12-18 Andreas Krebbel
> >
> > * ira.c (ira_setup_alts): M
On 02/05/2016 04:25 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
The following patch fixes the performance regression for 435.gromacs
on x86_64 with AVX2 (Haswell or bdver2) caused by
2015-12-18 Andreas Krebbel
* ira.c (ira_setup_alts): Move the scan for commutative modifier
to the first loop t
On Fri, 5 Feb 2016, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 02/05/2016 01:42 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > so indeed the issue is not dx dieing in insn 10 but ax dieing in insn 8...
> >
> > Maybe LRA can prefer to not do that if enough free registers are
> > available (that is, never re-use a register)?
>
> M
On Fri, 5 Feb 2016, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 01:35:03PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Fri, 5 Feb 2016, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 01:10:26PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > > Otherwise bootstrap / testing went ok and a full SPEC 2k6 run d
On 02/05/2016 01:42 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
so indeed the issue is not dx dieing in insn 10 but ax dieing in insn 8...
Maybe LRA can prefer to not do that if enough free registers are
available (that is, never re-use a register)?
Maybe, but at this stage that will probably also have some unp
On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 01:35:03PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Feb 2016, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 01:10:26PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > Otherwise bootstrap / testing went ok and a full SPEC 2k6 run doesn't
> > > show any regressions.
> >
> > Any impr
On Fri, 5 Feb 2016, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 02/05/2016 01:10 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > It fails
> >
> > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/addr-sel-1.c scan-assembler b+1
> >
> > on i?86 (or x86_64 -m32) though, generating
> >
> > f:
> > .LFB0:
> > .cfi_startproc
> > movl4(%e
On Fri, 5 Feb 2016, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 01:10:26PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > Otherwise bootstrap / testing went ok and a full SPEC 2k6 run doesn't
> > show any regressions.
>
> Any improvements there?
Noise, but I only did 1 run (I did 3 only for 435.gromacs to
On 02/05/2016 01:10 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
It fails
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/addr-sel-1.c scan-assembler b+1
on i?86 (or x86_64 -m32) though, generating
f:
.LFB0:
.cfi_startproc
movl4(%esp), %eax
leal1(%eax), %edx
movsbl a+1(%eax), %eax
On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 01:10:26PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> Otherwise bootstrap / testing went ok and a full SPEC 2k6 run doesn't
> show any regressions.
Any improvements there?
Jakub
On Fri, 5 Feb 2016, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> The following patch fixes the performance regression for 435.gromacs
> on x86_64 with AVX2 (Haswell or bdver2) caused by
>
> 2015-12-18 Andreas Krebbel
>
> * ira.c (ira_setup_alts): Move the scan for commutative modifier
> to the firs
16 matches
Mail list logo
