From: "Kewen.Lin" <linkw@linux.ibm.com>
To: Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp@axis.com>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/11] cris: Update unexpected empty split condition
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2021 11:25:28 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1969afe5-1866-cccb-05e1-4d19d2c7c911@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210603161225.63575203AF@pchp3.se.axis.com>
on 2021/6/4 上午12:12, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
>> From: Kewen.Lin <linkw@linux.ibm.com>
>> Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2021 07:45:57 +0200
>
>> on 2021/6/2 Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
>>>> From: Kewen Lin <linkw@linux.ibm.com>
>>>> Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2021 07:04:54 +0200
>>>
>>>> gcc/ChangeLog:
>>>>
>>>> * config/cris/cris.md (*addi_reload): Fix empty split condition.
>
>>>> - ""
>>>> + "&& 1"
>
>>> Ok, thanks, if only for all-round consistency.
>>>
>>> In preparation for a warning for an empty condition? I'm
>>> usually all for .md-warnings, but I'm not sure about the
>>> benefit of that one, though. Those "&& 1" look...hackish.
>>
>> Thanks! Yeah, the 01/11 patch aims to raise one error message
>> for the define_insn_and_split whose split condition is empty
>> while insn condition isn't. In most cases, when we write one
>> define_insn_and_split we want the splitting only to take effect
>> while we see the define_insn matching happen (insn cond holds),
>> but if we leave the split condition empty, the splitting will
>> be done always, it could result in some unexpected consequence.
>> Mostly this is unintentional.
>
> It certainly was in the patch above!
>
>> The error message is to avoid
>> people to make it unintentionally.
>>
>> As you may have seen from the discussion under the 00/11 thread,
>> we will probably end up with some other solution, so I will hold
>> the changes for the ports, sorry for wasting your time and the
>> other port maintainers'.
>
> No worries: I certainly don't consider it wasted and I'd
> prefer to have the patch above committed sooner than the
> conclusion of that discussion. (If you don't get to it,
> I'll do it, after a round of testing.)
>
Thanks for your help on testing!
> If you're considering further target patches to adjust for
> eventually changed semantics in the define_insn_and_split
> split-condition, then whatever trivial patch to cris.md that
> gets the effect of the one you sent is preapproved.
>
OK, thanks again!
BR,
Kewen
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-04 3:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-02 5:04 [RFC/PATCH 00/11] Fix up some unexpected empty split conditions Kewen Lin
2021-06-02 5:04 ` [PATCH 01/11] gen: Emit error msg for empty split condition Kewen Lin
2021-06-02 7:04 ` Richard Biener
2021-06-02 7:27 ` Kewen.Lin
2021-06-02 7:43 ` Richard Biener
2021-06-02 8:18 ` Kewen.Lin
2021-06-02 23:35 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-06-04 19:03 ` Martin Sebor
2021-06-04 19:37 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-06-02 5:04 ` [PATCH 02/11] arc: Update unexpected " Kewen Lin
2021-06-02 6:52 ` Claudiu Zissulescu
2021-06-02 7:05 ` Kewen.Lin
2021-06-02 7:12 ` Claudiu Zissulescu
2021-06-02 7:43 ` [PATCH 02/11 v2] arc: Remove define_insn_and_split *bbit_di Kewen.Lin
2021-06-02 8:33 ` Claudiu Zissulescu
2021-06-02 5:04 ` [PATCH 03/11] arm: Update unexpected empty split condition Kewen Lin
2021-06-02 9:02 ` Kyrylo Tkachov
2021-06-02 5:04 ` [PATCH 04/11] cris: " Kewen Lin
2021-06-02 12:45 ` Hans-Peter Nilsson
2021-06-03 5:45 ` Kewen.Lin
2021-06-03 16:12 ` Hans-Peter Nilsson
2021-06-03 22:33 ` Hans-Peter Nilsson
2021-06-04 3:25 ` Kewen.Lin [this message]
2021-06-02 5:04 ` [PATCH 05/11] h8300: " Kewen Lin
2021-06-02 17:10 ` Jeff Law
2021-06-02 5:04 ` [PATCH 06/11] i386: " Kewen Lin
2021-06-02 6:28 ` Uros Bizjak
2021-06-02 5:04 ` [PATCH 07/11] m68k: " Kewen Lin
2021-06-02 17:08 ` Jeff Law
2021-06-02 5:04 ` [PATCH 08/11] mips: " Kewen Lin
2021-06-02 17:11 ` Jeff Law
2021-06-02 5:04 ` [PATCH 09/11] or1k: " Kewen Lin
2021-06-02 5:05 ` [PATCH 10/11] sh: " Kewen Lin
2021-06-02 5:17 ` Oleg Endo
2021-06-02 5:05 ` [PATCH 11/11] sparc: " Kewen Lin
2021-06-02 8:11 ` [RFC/PATCH 00/11] Fix up some unexpected empty split conditions Richard Sandiford
2021-06-02 8:37 ` Kewen.Lin
2021-06-02 9:13 ` Richard Sandiford
2021-06-02 10:01 ` Kewen.Lin
2021-06-02 10:12 ` Richard Biener
2021-06-02 17:32 ` Richard Sandiford
2021-06-02 18:25 ` Jeff Law
2021-06-02 23:52 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-06-03 5:22 ` Kewen.Lin
2021-06-03 8:00 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-06-03 9:18 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-06-04 2:57 ` Kewen.Lin
2021-06-07 7:12 ` Richard Biener
2021-06-08 1:45 ` Kewen.Lin
2021-06-07 23:50 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-06-08 2:09 ` Kewen.Lin
2021-06-08 7:08 ` Richard Biener
2021-06-08 12:30 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-06-08 12:50 ` Richard Biener
2021-06-03 17:11 ` Jeff Law
2021-06-03 22:19 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-06-03 8:05 ` Richard Sandiford
2021-06-03 10:01 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-06-03 10:25 ` Richard Sandiford
2021-06-03 21:25 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-06-03 21:34 ` Jakub Jelinek
2021-06-04 3:33 ` Kewen.Lin
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=1969afe5-1866-cccb-05e1-4d19d2c7c911@linux.ibm.com \
--to=linkw@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=hp@axis.com \
/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).