public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "zhenqiang.chen at arm dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/63743] Thumb1: big regression for float operators by r216728
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2014 10:21:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-63743-4-83q6pjR8HR@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-63743-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63743
--- Comment #4 from Zhenqiang Chen <zhenqiang.chen at arm dot com> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> (In reply to Zhenqiang Chen from comment #2)
> > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> > > Were we swapping operands before? I mean, if you rewrite the testcase to
> > > swap the * arguments in the source, did you get the same more efficient code
> > > in the past?
> >
> > Yes. I tried the test case:
> >
> > double
> > test1 (double x, double y)
> > {
> > return x * (x + y);
> > }
> > double
> > test2 (double x, double y)
> > {
> > return (x + y) * x;
> > }
> >
> > Without r216728, I got efficient codes for both functions. But with r216728,
> > I got inefficient codes for both functions.
>
> What about
> double
> test3 (double x, double y)
> {
> return (x + y) * (x - y);
> }
> ? At least from quick looking at ppc -msoft-float -O2 -m32, I see the same
> issue there, add called first, sub called second, and result of second
> returned in the same registers as used for the first argument. So something
> to handle at expansion or RA rather than in GIMPLE anyway IMHO.
Same issue for the case on Thumb1.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-11-05 10:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-11-05 8:20 [Bug tree-optimization/63743] New: " zhenqiang.chen at arm dot com
2014-11-05 8:35 ` [Bug tree-optimization/63743] " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-11-05 9:40 ` zhenqiang.chen at arm dot com
2014-11-05 9:51 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-11-05 10:21 ` zhenqiang.chen at arm dot com [this message]
2014-11-05 12:34 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-12-26 13:54 ` ysrumyan at gmail dot com
2015-01-15 14:56 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-28 8:01 ` thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-03-04 6:58 ` thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-03-09 1:32 ` thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-03-11 5:06 ` thopre01 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-63743-4-83q6pjR8HR@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).