From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 61606 invoked by alias); 12 Jul 2019 13:28:31 -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 61557 invoked by uid 89); 12 Jul 2019 13:28:30 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy= X-HELO: gate.crashing.org Received: from gate.crashing.org (HELO gate.crashing.org) (63.228.1.57) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 12 Jul 2019 13:28:29 +0000 Received: from gate.crashing.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id x6CDSQPL012528; Fri, 12 Jul 2019 08:28:26 -0500 Received: (from segher@localhost) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id x6CDSOmQ012526; Fri, 12 Jul 2019 08:28:24 -0500 Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2019 14:10:00 -0000 From: Segher Boessenkool To: Richard Biener Cc: "Kewen.Lin" , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, wschmidt@linux.ibm.com, bin.cheng@linux.alibaba.com, jakub@redhat.com, Jeff Law , Kugan Vivekanandarajah Subject: Re: [PING^1][PATCH v4 3/3] PR80791 Consider doloop cmp use in ivopts Message-ID: <20190712132823.GN14074@gate.crashing.org> References: <1557803406-123657-1-git-send-email-linkw@linux.ibm.com> <2d897dc2-a01c-5005-6973-aad0c5930aa8@linux.ibm.com> <20190620090859.GU7313@gate.crashing.org> <32eb9bfd-c996-821d-730c-7c83002cf345@linux.ibm.com> <0e839d7c-7848-a7fa-2a4d-12d8616e031c@linux.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-07/txt/msg00977.txt.bz2 On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 02:11:16PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > Am I correct that doloop HW implementations are constrainted > by a decrement of one? GCC's doloop patterns are. Not all hardware is. Segher