On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 2:27 PM Christoph Müllner wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 11:29 AM Kito Cheng wrote:
> >
> > Sounds like we could just use !tune_param->slow_unaligned_access for
> > TARGET_OVERLAP_OP_BY_PIECES_P?
> > since it improves both performance and code size if we have cheap
> >
On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 11:29 AM Kito Cheng wrote:
>
> Sounds like we could just use !tune_param->slow_unaligned_access for
> TARGET_OVERLAP_OP_BY_PIECES_P?
> since it improves both performance and code size if we have cheap
> unaligned accesses.
Fine for me as well.
I'll prepare a v2, that uses
Sounds like we could just use !tune_param->slow_unaligned_access for
TARGET_OVERLAP_OP_BY_PIECES_P?
since it improves both performance and code size if we have cheap
unaligned accesses.
On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 5:23 PM Christoph Müllner via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 10:53 AM K
On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 10:53 AM Kito Cheng wrote:
>
> It's my first time seeing this hook :p Did you mind describing when we
> need to set it to true?
> I mean when a CPU has some feature then we can/should set it to true?
The by-pieces infrastructure allows to inline builtins quite well and
use
It's my first time seeing this hook :p Did you mind describing when we
need to set it to true?
I mean when a CPU has some feature then we can/should set it to true?
On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 7:33 AM Christoph Muellner via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> This patch adds the field overlap_op_by_pieces to the
