From: Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>
To: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: vmakarov@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtl-optimization/110587 - speedup find_hard_regno_for_1
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2023 09:58:03 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <44c7f5b9-f3d9-4d7a-7090-d483e002ff21@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <nycvar.YFH.7.77.849.2307311054080.12935@jbgna.fhfr.qr>
On 7/31/23 04:54, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Jul 2023, Richard Biener wrote:
>
>> The following applies a micro-optimization to find_hard_regno_for_1,
>> re-ordering the check so we can easily jump-thread by using an else.
>> This reduces the time spent in this function by 15% for the testcase
>> in the PR.
>>
>> Bootstrap & regtest running on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, OK if that
>> passes?
>
> Ping.
>
>> Thanks,
>> Richard.
>>
>> PR rtl-optimization/110587
>> * lra-assigns.cc (find_hard_regno_for_1): Re-order checks.
>> ---
>> gcc/lra-assigns.cc | 9 +++++----
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/gcc/lra-assigns.cc b/gcc/lra-assigns.cc
>> index b8582dcafff..d2ebcfd5056 100644
>> --- a/gcc/lra-assigns.cc
>> +++ b/gcc/lra-assigns.cc
>> @@ -522,14 +522,15 @@ find_hard_regno_for_1 (int regno, int *cost, int try_only_hard_regno,
>> r2 != NULL;
>> r2 = r2->start_next)
>> {
>> - if (r2->regno >= lra_constraint_new_regno_start
>> + if (live_pseudos_reg_renumber[r2->regno] < 0
>> + && r2->regno >= lra_constraint_new_regno_start
>> && lra_reg_info[r2->regno].preferred_hard_regno1 >= 0
>> - && live_pseudos_reg_renumber[r2->regno] < 0
>> && rclass_intersect_p[regno_allocno_class_array[r2->regno]])
>> sparseset_set_bit (conflict_reload_and_inheritance_pseudos,
>> r2->regno);
>> - if (live_pseudos_reg_renumber[r2->regno] >= 0
>> - && rclass_intersect_p[regno_allocno_class_array[r2->regno]])
>> + else if (live_pseudos_reg_renumber[r2->regno] >= 0
>> + && rclass_intersect_p
>> + [regno_allocno_class_array[r2->regno]])
>> sparseset_set_bit (live_range_hard_reg_pseudos, r2->regno);
My biggest concern here would be r2->regno < 0 in the new code which
could cause an OOB array reference in the first condition of the test.
Isn't that the point if the original ordering? Test that r2->regno is
reasonable before using it as an array index?
jeff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-07-31 15:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-07-31 10:54 Richard Biener
2023-07-31 15:58 ` Jeff Law [this message]
2023-08-02 8:16 ` Richard Biener
2023-08-07 13:18 ` Richard Biener
2023-08-08 16:49 ` Vladimir Makarov
2023-08-08 16:50 ` Jeff Law
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2023-07-25 13:40 Richard Biener
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=44c7f5b9-f3d9-4d7a-7090-d483e002ff21@gmail.com \
--to=jeffreyalaw@gmail.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=rguenther@suse.de \
--cc=vmakarov@redhat.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).