On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 3:55 PM, Kugan Vivekanandarajah
wrote:
> Implements tree loop unroller using the infrastructure provided.
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> 2018-02-12 Kugan Vivekanandarajah
>
> * Makefile.in (OBJS): Add tree-ssa-loop-unroll.o.
> * common.opt (ftree-loop-unroll): New option
Hi,
On Fri, 16 Feb 2018, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
> > How so?
>
> I thought it is well-known for many years that the rtl unroller doesn't
> work properly. In practically all cases where LLVM beats GCC, it is due
> to unrolling small loops.
I thought it was because of vectorizing at -O2, not due
Hi Richard,
On 16 February 2018 at 22:56, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 11:30 PM, Kugan Vivekanandarajah
> wrote:
>> Hi Wilko,
>>
>> Thanks for your comments.
>>
>> On 14 February 2018 at 00:05, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
>>> Hi Kugan,
>>>
Based on the previous discussions, I
Richard Biener wrote:
> With Ooo CPUs speculatively executing the next iterations I very much doubt
> that.
OoO execution is like really dumb loop unrolling, you still have all the
dependencies
between iterations, all the branches, all the pointer increments etc.
Optimizing those
reduces instr
On February 16, 2018 3:22:22 PM GMT+01:00, Wilco Dijkstra
wrote:
>Richard Biener wrote:
>>> This is a great plan - GCC urgently requires a good unroller!
>>
>> How so?
>
>I thought it is well-known for many years that the rtl unroller doesn't
>work properly.
>In practically all cases where LLVM b
Richard Biener wrote:
>> This is a great plan - GCC urgently requires a good unroller!
>
> How so?
I thought it is well-known for many years that the rtl unroller doesn't work
properly.
In practically all cases where LLVM beats GCC, it is due to unrolling small
loops.
You may have noticed how p
On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 11:30 PM, Kugan Vivekanandarajah
wrote:
> Hi Wilko,
>
> Thanks for your comments.
>
> On 14 February 2018 at 00:05, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
>> Hi Kugan,
>>
>>> Based on the previous discussions, I tried to implement a tree loop
>>> unroller for partial unrolling. I would lik
Hi Wilko,
Thanks for your comments.
On 14 February 2018 at 00:05, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
> Hi Kugan,
>
>> Based on the previous discussions, I tried to implement a tree loop
>> unroller for partial unrolling. I would like to queue this RFC patches
>> for next stage1 review.
>
> This is a great pl
Hi Kugan,
> Based on the previous discussions, I tried to implement a tree loop
> unroller for partial unrolling. I would like to queue this RFC patches
> for next stage1 review.
This is a great plan - GCC urgently requires a good unroller!
> * Cost-model for selecting the loop uses the same par
