From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 101061 invoked by alias); 22 Nov 2017 09:55:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 101042 invoked by uid 89); 22 Nov 2017 09:55:30 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,KB_WAM_FROM_NAME_SINGLEWORD,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 09:55:29 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 06E4E1112; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 09:55:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (ovpn-116-247.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.247]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9875B60C96; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 09:55:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id vAM9tODX018095; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 10:55:25 +0100 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id vAM9tNlV018094; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 10:55:23 +0100 Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2017 10:09:00 -0000 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Richard Biener Cc: Richard Sandiford , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix mult expansion ICE (PR middle-end/82875) Message-ID: <20171122095523.GK14653@tucnak> Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <20171122091718.GH14653@tucnak> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-11/txt/msg01995.txt.bz2 On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 10:41:19AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > How much churn would it be to pass down a mode alongside the operands > in expand_binop? Can't find it right now but didn't we introduce > some rtx_with_mode pair-like stuff somewhen? We have rtx_mode_t for that. But there are 240+ calls to expand_binop, and even if we add an overload that will transform it, unless we forcefully inline it wouldn't that slow down all the spots a little bit? The thing is, for the vast majority of binary ops we don't need the operand modes, it is mainly comparisons, second arg of shifts/rotates and this widening case. Jakub