From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 112806 invoked by alias); 31 Jul 2015 18:28:07 -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 112786 invoked by uid 89); 31 Jul 2015 18:28:06 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 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 (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 18:28:01 +0000 Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1B7C293201; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 18:27:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (ovpn-113-21.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.21]) by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t6VIRxx3016256; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 14:27:59 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Optimize certain end of loop conditions into min/max operation To: Michael Collison , Richard Biener References: <55B5A884.4060105@linaro.org> <55B65A4B.3050705@redhat.com> <55BBA052.2060900@redhat.com> <55BBBBE6.2070207@linaro.org> Cc: gcc Patches From: Jeff Law Message-ID: <55BBBE2E.1020408@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 19:10:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <55BBBBE6.2070207@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-07/txt/msg02708.txt.bz2 On 07/31/2015 12:18 PM, Michael Collison wrote: > Hi Jeff, > > Yes I will create a test case. I'm not quite sure what to check for even > in the machine dependent test case. It's quite possible for the > instructions that are generated to change over time. I think we're going to want to look at the gimple IR and search for the MIN/MAX expressions rather than the instructions. Given we don't know where the transformation is going to land (yet), you can probably start with -fdump-tree-optimized and scanning the .optimized dump. We can still do that and have the test be target specific. jeff