public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "segher at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/78103] Failure to optimize with __builtin_clzl
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2021 12:35:39 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-78103-4-TFSYziP6sg@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-78103-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78103
--- Comment #17 from Segher Boessenkool <segher at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #16)
> Created attachment 51209 [details]
> gcc12-pr78103.patch
>
> Updated patch. This one fixes the reuse of a pseudo you've mentioned above,
> and fixes gcc.target/i386/pr101175.c regression the patch reintroduced by
> adding !TARGET_LZCNT conditions to the two new define_insns.
Great :-)
> Nothing changes for combine though, I think it really would be nice if it
> could either change newly added pseudos from combine_split_insns by i2dest
> if possible,
Is that ever safe to do?
> or better handle new pseudos from both combine_split_insns and
> when
> for find_split_point i2dest can't be resued with creating LOG_LINKS.
You cannot safely attempt to combine the two insns split to again, neither
alone nor in combination with other insns. Since pretty much by definition
that new reg will be set in the new i2 and used in (only) in the new i3,
no combination with that new reg is valid ever?
> I guess I can work around this by using define_insn_and_split instead of a
> combiner splitter, but combine splitters are cleaner...
Sometimes it helps to pretend you have an instruction you do not. Both pure
splitters and define_insn_and_split have their place :-)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-07-27 12:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <bug-78103-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2021-07-24 6:20 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-07-24 12:28 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-07-26 10:57 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-07-26 11:14 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-07-26 11:22 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-07-26 12:11 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-07-26 21:01 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-07-26 21:08 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-07-26 21:26 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-07-27 8:52 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-07-27 12:35 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2021-07-27 12:41 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-07-27 13:53 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-07-27 15:25 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-07-27 15:37 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-07-31 7:21 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-07-31 8:24 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-08-01 20:33 ` cvs-commit 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-78103-4-TFSYziP6sg@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).