public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug target/87601] Missed opportunity for flag reuse and macro-op fusion on x86
       [not found] <bug-87601-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
@ 2021-12-21 11:08 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
  2021-12-21 11:09 ` [Bug tree-optimization/87601] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-12-21 11:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87601

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
        sub     rsi, 1
        test    esi, esi
        jne     .L3

To
        sub     rsi, 1
        jne     .L3

Is not the same, the first is a 64bit subtract followed by a 32bit compare. in
the 2nd case, you have a 64bit subtract with the 64bit compare happening.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

* [Bug tree-optimization/87601] Missed opportunity for flag reuse and macro-op fusion on x86
       [not found] <bug-87601-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
  2021-12-21 11:08 ` [Bug target/87601] Missed opportunity for flag reuse and macro-op fusion on x86 pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-12-21 11:09 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-12-21 11:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87601

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2021-12-21
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
          Component|target                      |tree-optimization
           Severity|normal                      |enhancement
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
But IV-OPTs could have changed:
  i_19 = (int) ivtmp.8_22;
  if (i_19 != 0)
    goto <bb 4>; [89.00%]
  else
    goto <bb 5>; [11.00%]

Into:
  if (ivtmp.8_22 != 0)
    goto <bb 4>; [89.00%]
  else
    goto <bb 5>; [11.00%]

Which would have done the correct thing.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2021-12-21 11:09 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
     [not found] <bug-87601-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2021-12-21 11:08 ` [Bug target/87601] Missed opportunity for flag reuse and macro-op fusion on x86 pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-12-21 11:09 ` [Bug tree-optimization/87601] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org

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).