public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/54089] [SH] Refactor shift patterns Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2023 12:39:06 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-54089-4-GepourUlBi@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-54089-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54089 --- Comment #63 from Oleg Endo <olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Alexander Klepikov from comment #62) > > My project is small and it compiles in under 1 second on both clean and > patched GCC. sh.exp test suite mean run time is 117s on clean and 119s on > patched. I did 1 warm-up run and then 3 main one-threaded runs for each > task. I'm thinking of something else. We have to consider that SH is also a linux target and it's also used to build larger applications (and GCC itself ...). It'd be good to not regress too much in this regard. One way to check it is the CSiBE test set. I can help testing your patch later. > > Implementing features not supported by hardware will always be a tradeoff. I'd say it's generally about how to find the best choice of instructions/sequences. With GCC's "waterfall" optimization it's impossible to find the best solution because it doesn't have a way to compare the total cost of one solution vs. another, for example. We have to work around that ;)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-06 12:39 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 102+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2012-07-24 23:42 [Bug target/54089] New: " olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-07-24 23:46 ` [Bug target/54089] " olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-07-25 23:03 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-07-27 17:36 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-07-30 6:43 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-09 21:55 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-09 23:18 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-09 23:28 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-09 23:36 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-09 23:43 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-10 0:40 ` kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-10 14:25 ` rmansfield at qnx dot com 2012-08-10 15:40 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-11 20:26 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-16 23:13 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-20 21:29 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-22 22:52 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-10 20:35 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-10 21:27 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-17 23:30 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-19 17:49 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-25 19:07 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-30 18:46 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-16 10:53 ` amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-16 11:49 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-06 11:56 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-07 23:32 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-09 10:48 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-09 13:29 ` amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-13 1:14 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-02-16 11:36 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-12-17 11:11 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-05-16 23:12 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-12-16 21:38 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-05-30 13:51 ` bugdal at aerifal dot cx 2015-05-30 14:11 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-05-30 14:35 ` bugdal at aerifal dot cx 2015-05-30 14:42 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-05-30 14:46 ` bugdal at aerifal dot cx 2015-05-30 14:57 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-08-11 3:56 ` bugdal at aerifal dot cx 2015-08-11 14:17 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-08-11 21:05 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-08-12 1:30 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-01 7:32 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-06-01 8:21 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-01 11:18 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-06-01 12:08 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-01 17:45 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-01 20:46 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-03 7:24 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-06-03 8:50 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-03 15:43 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-06-03 16:09 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-04 18:35 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-06-05 0:03 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-06 10:30 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-06-06 10:51 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-06 12:17 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-06-06 12:39 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2023-06-06 12:55 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-06-06 16:10 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-06-06 19:07 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-06-06 23:11 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-08 12:07 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-06-08 12:09 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-06-08 13:22 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-08 15:22 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-06-08 20:17 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-14 9:30 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-06-14 9:31 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-06-16 13:57 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-06-16 21:58 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-17 6:08 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-06-17 7:06 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-17 8:24 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-06-17 9:46 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-17 11:00 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-06-17 17:57 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-06-20 11:28 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-06-20 17:03 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-06-20 23:46 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-21 11:51 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-06-21 20:13 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-21 20:32 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-22 11:09 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-06-22 11:44 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-22 12:34 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-06-23 6:02 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-06-23 6:06 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-23 14:11 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-07-06 14:16 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-07-07 11:10 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-07-07 11:45 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-07-08 7:56 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-07-09 13:55 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-07-10 14:02 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-07-13 23:40 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-07-14 14:31 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-10-13 5:02 ` olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-10-14 15:20 ` klepikov.alex+bugs at gmail dot com 2023-10-15 1:06 ` 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-54089-4-GepourUlBi@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).