From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=qpCF=AR=loongson.cn=chenglulu@sourceware.org>
Received: from loongson.cn (mail.loongson.cn [114.242.206.163])
	by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E5363858CDA
	for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Wed, 26 Apr 2023 09:53:51 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 3E5363858CDA
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=loongson.cn
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=loongson.cn
Received: from loongson.cn (unknown [10.20.4.52])
	by gateway (Coremail) with SMTP id _____8DxyOms9Ehk9_0AAA--.1752S3;
	Wed, 26 Apr 2023 17:53:49 +0800 (CST)
Received: from [10.20.4.52] (unknown [10.20.4.52])
	by localhost.localdomain (Coremail) with SMTP id AQAAf8Cxfb6q9Ehk16c8AA--.34872S2;
	Wed, 26 Apr 2023 17:53:48 +0800 (CST)
Subject: Re: [PATCH] LoongArch: Enable shrink wrapping
To: Guo Jie <guojie@loongson.cn>, Xi Ruoyao <xry111@xry111.site>,
 gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: WANG Xuerui <i@xen0n.name>, Chenghua Xu <xuchenghua@loongson.cn>
References: <20230423131903.155998-1-xry111@xry111.site>
 <c73e3193-fb24-d665-ff44-03f9f6a98a18@loongson.cn>
 <afdbf9a0-07ee-1ef6-7e73-f337e5ace3cd@loongson.cn>
From: Lulu Cheng <chenglulu@loongson.cn>
Message-ID: <182bca4f-c605-8e0c-19ce-e840258b05d2@loongson.cn>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2023 17:53:46 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux mips64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <afdbf9a0-07ee-1ef6-7e73-f337e5ace3cd@loongson.cn>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
X-CM-TRANSID:AQAAf8Cxfb6q9Ehk16c8AA--.34872S2
X-CM-SenderInfo: xfkh0wpoxo3qxorr0wxvrqhubq/
X-Coremail-Antispam: 1Uk129KBjvJXoW7ZryxWFy3uryUJw45GrW7Arb_yoW8Cw4kpa
	97GFWrKrykAFn3Ww4xWFyjqFyfZr17tw15Zr97WFy0yrZ3ZryIgr4YqrWqgF17Gw48Gr15
	Z345ursxua15Z3DanT9S1TB71UUUUUDqnTZGkaVYY2UrUUUUj1kv1TuYvTs0mT0YCTnIWj
	qI5I8CrVACY4xI64kE6c02F40Ex7xfYxn0WfASr-VFAUDa7-sFnT9fnUUIcSsGvfJTRUUU
	bxAYFVCjjxCrM7AC8VAFwI0_Jr0_Gr1l1xkIjI8I6I8E6xAIw20EY4v20xvaj40_Wr0E3s
	1l1IIY67AEw4v_Jr0_Jr4l8cAvFVAK0II2c7xJM28CjxkF64kEwVA0rcxSw2x7M28EF7xv
	wVC0I7IYx2IY67AKxVWUCVW8JwA2z4x0Y4vE2Ix0cI8IcVCY1x0267AKxVW8JVWxJwA2z4
	x0Y4vEx4A2jsIE14v26r4UJVWxJr1l84ACjcxK6I8E87Iv6xkF7I0E14v26F4UJVW0owAS
	0I0E0xvYzxvE52x082IY62kv0487Mc804VCY07AIYIkI8VC2zVCFFI0UMc02F40EFcxC0V
	AKzVAqx4xG6I80ewAv7VC0I7IYx2IY67AKxVWUXVWUAwAv7VC2z280aVAFwI0_Jr0_Gr1l
	Ox8S6xCaFVCjc4AY6r1j6r4UM4x0Y48IcVAKI48JMxk0xIA0c2IEe2xFo4CEbIxvr21l42
	xK82IYc2Ij64vIr41l4I8I3I0E4IkC6x0Yz7v_Jr0_Gr1lx2IqxVAqx4xG67AKxVWUJVWU
	GwC20s026x8GjcxK67AKxVWUGVWUWwC2zVAF1VAY17CE14v26r126r1DMIIYrxkI7VAKI4
	8JMIIF0xvE2Ix0cI8IcVAFwI0_Jr0_JF4lIxAIcVC0I7IYx2IY6xkF7I0E14v26r1j6r4U
	MIIF0xvE42xK8VAvwI8IcIk0rVWUJVWUCwCI42IY6I8E87Iv67AKxVWUJVW8JwCI42IY6I
	8E87Iv6xkF7I0E14v26r1j6r4UYxBIdaVFxhVjvjDU0xZFpf9x07UNvtZUUUUU=
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,BODY_8BITS,GIT_PATCH_0,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,KAM_SHORT,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>

Hi, ruoyao:

       The performance of spec2006 is finished. The fixed-point 
400.perlbench has about 3% performance improvement,

and the other basics have not changed, and the floating-point tests have 
basically remained the same.

       Do you have any questions about the test cases mentioned by Guo 
Jie? If there is no problem, modify the test case,

I think the code can be merged into the main branch.


Thanks!

在 2023/4/25 下午5:12, Guo Jie 写道:
> /* snip */
>
>>>   diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/loongarch/shrink-wrap.c 
>>> b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/loongarch/shrink-wrap.c
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 00000000000..f2c867a2769
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/loongarch/shrink-wrap.c
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
>>> +/* { dg-do compile } */
>>> +/* { dg-options "-O -fshrink-wrap" } */
>>> +
>>> +/* f(x) should do nothing if x is 0.  */
>>> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler 
>>> "bnez\t\\\$r4,\[^\n\]*\n\tjr\t\\\$r1" } } */
>>> +
>>> +void g(void);
>>> +
>>> +void
>>> +f(int x)
>>> +{
>>> +  if (x)
>>> +    {
>>> +      register int s0 asm("s0") = x;
>>> +      register int s1 asm("s1") = x;
>>> +      register int s2 asm("s2") = x;
>>> +      asm("" : : "r"(s0));
>>> +      asm("" : : "r"(s1));
>>> +      asm("" : : "r"(s2));
>>> +      g();
>>> +    }
>>> +}
>
> I think the test case cannot fully reflect the optimization effect of 
> the current patch,
>
> because even without the patch, -O -fshrink-wrap will still perform 
> architecture independent optimization.
>
> This patch considers architecture related registers as finer grained 
> optimization for shrink wrapping,
>
> I think a test case like the one below is more suitable:
>
>
> int foo(int x)
> {
>   if (x)
>   {
>     __asm__ ("":::"s0","s1");
>     return x;
>   }
>
>   __asm__ ("":::"s2","s3");
>   return 0;
> }
>
> Otherwise LGTM, thanks!