On Wed, 2014-09-10 at 14:29 -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> Huh, interesting. I assumed 1-(0_or_1) and (0_or_1)^1 would look the
> same to combine, but no.
>
> With subfic, combine optimises it all to a branch on cr0. With xori,
> for some reason combine has a much easier job, and it optimise
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 01:38:13PM -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-09-09 at 19:28 -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 3:29 PM, Segher Boessenkool
> > > 2014-09-09 Segher Boessenkool
> > >
> > > * config/rs6000/htm.md (tabort, tabortdc, tabortdci, tabortwc,
On Tue, 2014-09-09 at 19:28 -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 3:29 PM, Segher Boessenkool
> > 2014-09-09 Segher Boessenkool
> >
> > * config/rs6000/htm.md (tabort, tabortdc, tabortdci, tabortwc,
> > tabortwci, tbegin, tcheck, tend, trechkpt, treclaim, tsr): Us
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 3:29 PM, Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
> These patterns use subfic now. subfic clobbers the carry. Other code
> already preferably uses xor. Let's do the same here.
>
> Bootstrapped and tested as usual, no regressions. Is this okay to apply?
>
>
> Segher
>
>
> 2014-09-09 Se
