From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from franke.ms (serveronline.org [78.46.86.77]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B345D3854801 for ; Fri, 26 Mar 2021 06:47:32 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org B345D3854801 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=franke.ms Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=stefan@franke.ms Received: from ZETRA (pd9e55907.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [217.229.89.7]) by serveronline.org (BEJY V1.6.12-SNAPSHOT (c) 2000-2021 by BebboSoft, Stefan "Bebbo" Franke, all rights reserved) with SMTP id 1786d49b7d2802843025d4c7507 from stefan@franke.ms for gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; Fri, 26 Mar 2021 07:47:31 +0100 Reply-To: From: "Stefan Franke" To: References: <00fb01d72182$266be7f0$7343b7d0$@franke.ms> <011601d72186$41fad1d0$c5f07570$@franke.ms> <013801d721b3$cba68730$62f39590$@franke.ms> In-Reply-To: Subject: AW: AW: AW: setmemsi, movmemsi and post_inc Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2021 07:47:30 +0100 Message-ID: <014101d7220b$e4f3da50$aedb8ef0$@franke.ms> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0 Thread-Index: AQHmLYYsPkc4yAQL4m3ARkRYmQI1bQL29H5sAg0fyKEBl2OG7gIWkpd3AVy8sNuqJ0V5IA== Content-Language: de X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-help mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2021 06:47:34 -0000 > Von: Gcc-help Im Auftrag von Jeff Law = via > On 3/25/2021 2:16 PM, Stefan Franke wrote: > > > > At least it seems possible to use auto_inc inside an emitted loop, = since that > yields a separate bb... >=20 > I wouldn't rely on that. >=20 What about using (parallel ) as envelope for the loop body? Or even create a pseudo insn which yield the loop body as asm template? STefan