From: Nigel Stephens <nigel@mips.com>
To: Sandra Loosemore <sandra@codesourcery.com>,
GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
Nigel Stephens <nigel@mips.com>, Guy Morrogh <guym@mips.com>,
David Ung <davidu@mips.com>, Thiemo Seufer <ths@mips.com>,
Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>,
richard@codesourcery.com
Subject: Re: PATCH: fine-tuning for can_store_by_pieces
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 10:34:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <46CABE2A.2090406@mips.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87ps1h5mda.fsf@firetop.home>
Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Sandra Loosemore <sandra@codesourcery.com> writes:
>
>> OK, but what I was really asking was, is there a way to *test* for
>> situations where we should generate the lui/ori/sw sequences instead
>> of the lw/sw? Some combination of TARGET_foo flags and/or the size of
>> the string?
>>
>
> Well, I suppose:
>
> !optimize_size && !TARGET_MIPS16 && mips_issue_rate () > 1
>
>
Many MIPS dual-issue processors are asymettric, and may be able to issue
lui, ori and sw down only one pipe or the other -- not both in parallel.
So I don't think that testing mips_issue_rate() is sufficient.
Nigel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-08-21 10:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-08-15 17:15 Sandra Loosemore
2007-08-15 17:22 ` Andrew Pinski
2007-08-15 18:32 ` Sandra Loosemore
2007-08-15 19:53 ` Nigel Stephens
2007-08-15 19:58 ` Sandra Loosemore
2007-08-17 4:50 ` Mark Mitchell
2007-08-17 13:24 ` Sandra Loosemore
2007-08-17 18:55 ` Mark Mitchell
2007-08-16 8:34 ` Richard Sandiford
2007-08-16 19:41 ` Sandra Loosemore
2007-08-19 0:03 ` Sandra Loosemore
2007-08-20 8:22 ` Richard Sandiford
2007-08-20 23:38 ` Sandra Loosemore
2007-08-21 8:21 ` Richard Sandiford
2007-08-21 10:34 ` Nigel Stephens [this message]
2007-08-21 11:53 ` Richard Sandiford
2007-08-21 12:14 ` Nigel Stephens
2007-08-21 12:35 ` Richard Sandiford
2007-08-21 13:54 ` Sandra Loosemore
2007-08-21 14:22 ` Richard Sandiford
2007-08-21 20:39 ` Sandra Loosemore
2007-08-21 20:56 ` Richard Sandiford
2007-08-23 14:35 ` Sandra Loosemore
2007-08-23 14:44 ` Richard Sandiford
2007-08-25 5:35 ` [committed] " Sandra Loosemore
2007-08-25 9:18 ` Jakub Jelinek
2007-08-25 9:58 ` Jakub Jelinek
2007-08-25 14:30 ` gcc.c-torture/execute/20030221-1.c regressed with "fine-tuning for can_store_by_pieces" Hans-Peter Nilsson
2007-08-25 14:40 ` [committed] Re: PATCH: fine-tuning for can_store_by_pieces Sandra Loosemore
2007-08-24 22:06 ` Mark Mitchell
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=46CABE2A.2090406@mips.com \
--to=nigel@mips.com \
--cc=davidu@mips.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=guym@mips.com \
--cc=mark@codesourcery.com \
--cc=richard@codesourcery.com \
--cc=sandra@codesourcery.com \
--cc=ths@mips.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).