From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4544 invoked by alias); 7 Jul 2011 17:08:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 4531 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Jul 2011 17:08:49 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 07 Jul 2011 17:08:33 +0000 Received: (qmail 23047 invoked from network); 7 Jul 2011 17:08:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?84.152.222.114?) (bernds@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 7 Jul 2011 17:08:33 -0000 Message-ID: <4E15E809.1080003@codesourcery.com> Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2011 17:13:00 -0000 From: Bernd Schmidt User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110505 Lightning/1.0b3pre Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrey Belevantsev CC: GCC Patches , "Vladimir N. Makarov" Subject: Re: Fix PR 49014 References: <4DDCBC02.7020002@ispras.ru> <4DDD1528.8060200@codesourcery.com> <4DDD2043.1080703@ispras.ru> <4DDD20CE.4000707@codesourcery.com> <4DDE5657.4000601@ispras.ru> <4E0DDEBA.5000804@ispras.ru> In-Reply-To: <4E0DDEBA.5000804@ispras.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 X-SW-Source: 2011-07/txt/msg00530.txt.bz2 On 07/01/11 16:50, Andrey Belevantsev wrote: > On 26.05.2011 17:32, Andrey Belevantsev wrote: >> On 25.05.2011 19:31, Bernd Schmidt wrote: >>> On 05/25/2011 03:29 PM, Andrey Belevantsev wrote: >>>> I think the hook is a better idea than the attribute because nobody >>>> will >>>> care to mark all offending insns with an attribute. >>> >>> I don't know. IIRC when I looked at sh or whatever the broken port was, >>> it was only two insns - there would still be some value in being able to >>> assert that all other insns have a reservation. >> OK, I will take a look on x86-64 and will get back with more information. >> >> Andrey > So, I have made an attempt to bootstrap on x86-64 with the extra assert > in selective scheduling that assumes the DFA state always changes when > issuing a recog_memoized >=0 insn (patch attached). Indeed, there are > just a few general insns that don't have proper reservations. However, > it was a surprise to me to see that almost any insn with SSE registers > fails this assert and thus does not get properly scheduled. Probably because it's picking a scheduling description for an old CPU? With "-mcpu=pentium" probably none of the newer patterns has a reservation. That may scupper any plans to use this attribute on i386. > Overall, the work on fixing those seems doable, it took just a day to > get the compiler bootstrapped (of course, the testsuite may bring much > more issues). So, if there is an agreement on marking a few offending > insns with the new attribute, we can proceed with the help of somebody > from the x86 land on fixing those and researching for other targets. + (set (attr "nondfa_insn") (if_then_else (eq_attr "alternative" "3,4,5,6") (const_int 1) (const_int 0))) I think this shouldn't use (const_int x); you want to be able to write (set_attr "nondfa_insn" "0,0,0,1,1,1,1") Bernd