public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "law at redhat dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/37273] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] IRA does not re-materializes addresses (loads from the TOC) Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 13:51:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-37273-4-TCBGZlQjsZ@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-37273-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37273 --- Comment #5 from Jeffrey A. Law <law at redhat dot com> 2011-01-12 13:38:20 UTC --- First I think we need to note that if we allocate the pseudo holding the value for "ext" in memory that we get some savings (because "ext" is already sitting in memory waiting to be used). This is very similar to how we recognize some savings from allocating a pseudo to memory when the pseudo represents an argument loaded from its stack slot in ira-costs. Second, in that same code, we're double-counting the cost of allocating the pseudo to memory. If those two problems are fixed, we get the desired PPC code; however, significant benchmarking would be required to determine how this change affects a broader codebase. I'll note there's also a deficiency in caller-saves in that it insists on reloading the value into its original hard reg, even if the hard reg is going to be immediately copied to a different hard reg. I don't want to spend too much time on the caller-save aspects since ultimately I think caller-save needs to go away or at least have another rewrite. It's approaching 2 decades since it's last major revision.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-01-12 13:38 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top [not found] <bug-37273-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> 2010-10-01 12:09 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-10 18:39 ` law at redhat dot com 2011-01-12 13:51 ` law at redhat dot com [this message] 2011-01-17 16:14 ` law at redhat dot com 2011-01-21 17:26 ` law at redhat dot com 2011-01-25 14:52 ` law at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-25 14:55 ` law at redhat dot com 2011-01-27 0:17 ` law at redhat dot com 2011-02-02 17:47 ` dnovillo at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-15 21:24 ` law at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-15 21:30 ` law at redhat dot com 2011-03-17 20:10 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/37273] [4.4/4.5/4.6/4.7 " law at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-17 20:21 ` law at redhat dot com 2008-08-29 5:01 [Bug rtl-optimization/37273] New: [4.4 " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-30 9:01 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/37273] [4.4/4.5/4.6 " jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-37273-4-TCBGZlQjsZ@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).