public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vladimir Makarov <vmakarov@redhat.com>
To: Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>,
	liuhongt <hongtao.liu@intel.com>,
	gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Check hard_regno_mode_ok before setting lowest memory move cost for the mode with different reg classes.
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2023 08:58:47 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5c7ec820-944c-3e7e-329c-0617ffbf2bc2@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b3a35c94-f2a9-3fc0-e1c4-e15f4fd81c5c@gmail.com>


On 4/4/23 21:29, Jeff Law wrote:
>
>
> On 4/3/23 23:13, liuhongt via Gcc-patches wrote:
>> There's a potential performance issue when backend returns some
>> unreasonable value for the mode which can be never be allocate with
>> reg class.
>>
>> Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu{-m32,}.
>> Ok for trunk(or GCC14 stage1)?
>>
>> gcc/ChangeLog:
>>
>>     PR rtl-optimization/109351
>>     * ira.cc (setup_class_subset_and_memory_move_costs): Check
>>     hard_regno_mode_ok before setting lowest memory move cost for
>>     the mode with different reg classes.
> Not a regression *and* changing register allocation.  This seems like 
> it should defer to gcc-14.
>
Yes, I am agree.  It should wait for gcc-14, especially when we are 
close to the release. Also the testing x86-64 is not enough for such 
changes (although I tried ppc64le and did not find any problem).

Cost related patches for RA frequently result in new testsuite failures 
on some targets.  Even if the change seems obvious and expected to 
improve the generated code.

Target dependent code sometimes defines correctly the costs only for 
some possible cases and making less dependent from this pitfall is 
good.  So I think the patch moves us to the right direction.

The patch is ok for me to commit it to the trunk after the gcc-13 
release and if arm64 testing shows no GCC testsuite regression.

Thank you for working on this issue.



  reply	other threads:[~2023-04-05 12:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-04-04  5:13 liuhongt
2023-04-05  1:29 ` Jeff Law
2023-04-05 12:58   ` Vladimir Makarov [this message]
2023-04-06  5:07     ` Liu, Hongtao
2023-04-19  5:53       ` Hongtao Liu

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=5c7ec820-944c-3e7e-329c-0617ffbf2bc2@redhat.com \
    --to=vmakarov@redhat.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=hongtao.liu@intel.com \
    --cc=jeffreyalaw@gmail.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).