public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/95906] Failure to recognize max pattern with mask Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2020 14:47:46 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-95906-4-YbLC505PJw@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-95906-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95906 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> --- The master branch has been updated by Marc Glisse <glisse@gcc.gnu.org>: https://gcc.gnu.org/g:229752afe3156a3990dacaedb94c76846cebf132 commit r11-2577-g229752afe3156a3990dacaedb94c76846cebf132 Author: Marc Glisse <marc.glisse@inria.fr> Date: Wed Aug 5 16:45:33 2020 +0200 VEC_COND_EXPR optimizations When vector comparisons were forced to use vec_cond_expr, we lost a number of optimizations (my fault for not adding enough testcases to prevent that). This patch tries to unwrap vec_cond_expr a bit so some optimizations can still happen. I wasn't planning to add all those transformations together, but adding one caused a regression, whose fix introduced a second regression, etc. Restricting to constant folding would not be sufficient, we also need at least things like X|0 or X&X. The transformations are quite conservative with :s and folding only if everything simplifies, we may want to relax this later. And of course we are going to miss things like a?b:c + a?c:b -> b+c. In terms of number of operations, some transformations turning 2 VEC_COND_EXPR into VEC_COND_EXPR + BIT_IOR_EXPR + BIT_NOT_EXPR might not look like a gain... I expect the bit_not disappears in most cases, and VEC_COND_EXPR looks more costly than a simpler BIT_IOR_EXPR. 2020-08-05 Marc Glisse <marc.glisse@inria.fr> PR tree-optimization/95906 PR target/70314 * match.pd ((c ? a : b) op d, (c ? a : b) op (c ? d : e), (v ? w : 0) ? a : b, c1 ? c2 ? a : b : b): New transformations. (op (c ? a : b)): Update to match the new transformations. * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/andnot-2.c: New file. * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr95906.c: Likewise. * gcc.target/i386/pr70314.c: Likewise.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-05 14:47 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-06-26 4:17 [Bug tree-optimization/95906] New: " gabravier at gmail dot com 2020-06-26 6:52 ` [Bug tree-optimization/95906] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-06-26 21:23 ` glisse at gcc dot gnu.org 2020-08-05 14:47 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2020-08-05 15:08 ` glisse at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-07-25 4:37 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-09 15:25 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-09 20:45 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-09 20:48 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-08-23 2:43 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-08-23 2:55 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-08-23 5:18 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-08-23 5:21 ` pinskia 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-95906-4-YbLC505PJw@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).