public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "oleg.endo@t-online.de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/49263] SH Target: underutilized "TST #imm, R0" instruction
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 23:48:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-49263-4-rRL7M9ck8W@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-49263-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49263

--- Comment #9 from Oleg Endo <oleg.endo@t-online.de> 2011-10-10 23:48:17 UTC ---
Created attachment 25461
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25461
CSiBE comparisons

(In reply to comment #8)
> 
> Another combine pass to reduce size less than 0.3% on one target
> would be not acceptable, I guess.  

I'm sorry, I forgot to mention that it was just a proof of concept hack
of mine, just to see whether it has any chance to work at all.
I think it would be better to change/fix the behavior of the combine pass
in this regard, so that it tries matching combined patterns without
sophisticated transformations. I will try asking on the gcc list about that.

> ~10 new patterns would be
> overkill for that result, though I'm still expecting that a few
> patterns of them were dominant. 

Yep, even if it turned out to be actually only 8 patterns in total, but
still.. I haven't looked at the issue with SH4A but most likely it would add
another one or two patterns... so basically ~10 :)

> Could you get numbers which pattern
> was used in the former option?

I think it would be a bit too much checking out each individual pattern.
Instead I grouped them into what they are effectively doing.
While I was at it, I also added your peephole idea, and a top 10 listing of
the individual files.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-10-10 23:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-06-01 20:17 [Bug target/49263] New: " oleg.endo@t-online.de
2011-06-01 20:42 ` [Bug target/49263] " oleg.endo@t-online.de
2011-06-12 23:12 ` kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-06-19 16:42 ` oleg.endo@t-online.de
2011-06-22 22:34 ` kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-06-26 22:31 ` oleg.endo@t-online.de
2011-06-27  5:15 ` kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-09 23:35 ` oleg.endo@t-online.de
2011-10-10  1:32 ` kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-10 23:48 ` oleg.endo@t-online.de [this message]
2011-10-11  1:47 ` kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-13 22:55 ` oleg.endo@t-online.de
2011-10-14 23:06 ` kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-15  2:33 ` kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-11-20 14:20 ` oleg.endo@t-online.de
2011-12-29  1:09 ` oleg.endo@t-online.de
2012-02-26 16:28 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-02-26 23:29 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-08-27 19:52 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-10-28 22:02 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-10-31 13:47 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-12-08 13:47 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-12-17 12:37 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-12-30 18:45 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-24 13:05 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-26 23:57 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-12 11:46 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com
2023-05-23 12:34 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com
2023-05-23 12:35 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com
2023-05-23 19:05 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-24 11:40 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com
2023-05-24 11:57 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-24 13:34 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com
2023-05-24 15:00 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-25 17:53 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com
2023-05-25 21:32 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-26 12:03 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com
2023-05-26 17:44 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-28 10:24 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com
2023-05-28 10:48 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-29 14:54 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com
2023-05-30  1:48 ` egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-30  1:56 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-30 12:42 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com
2023-05-30 19:57 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-30 20:00 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.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-49263-4-rRL7M9ck8W@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: link
Be 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).