[Bug target/62055] New: missed optimization: recognize fnabs (FP negative absolute value) (x86-64)

[Bug target/62055] New: missed optimization: recognize fnabs (FP negative absolute value) (x86-64)

[spatel at rotateright dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62055

            Bug ID: 62055
           Summary: missed optimization: recognize fnabs (FP negative
                    absolute value) (x86-64)
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.9.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: target
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: spatel at rotateright dot com

$ cat fnabs.c
#include <math.h>
float foo(float a) {
    return -fabsf(a);
}
$ gcc49 -O1 fnabs.c -S -o -
    .text
    .globl _foo
_foo:
LFB19:
    movss    LC0(%rip), %xmm1
    andps    %xmm1, %xmm0
    movss    LC1(%rip), %xmm1
    xorps    %xmm1, %xmm0
    ret
LFE19:
    .literal16
    .align 4
LC0:
    .long    2147483647
    .long    0
    .long    0
    .long    0
    .align 4
LC1:
    .long    2147483648
    .long    0
    .long    0
    .long    0

---------------------------------------------------

That's a lot of constant pool data and instructions to turn on a single bit.

I think there are 2 steps to improving this. First, recognize that -(fabs(a))
can be transformed into an 'or' op:

    movss    LC0(%rip), %xmm1
        orps    %xmm1, %xmm0

LC0:
    .long    2147483648

Second, I don't think we need the extra 0 longs here; movss only loads 4 bytes.
This may require understanding that the upper vector elements for the 'orps'
are don't cares?

[Bug target/62055] missed optimization: recognize fnabs (FP negative absolute value) (x86-64)

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62055

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |missed-optimization
             Target|                            |x86_64-*-*, i?86-*-*
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2014-08-08
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Confirmed also with -ffast-math.