public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>
To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: PATCH: Properly check the end of basic block
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 10:47:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=FsHzQinx2HVrmf94LppvQ3gCd+-8tBrruXGwg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTik8TA3or7jM0SxaPcNLQ5Gk1m=htoAsKb20udPq@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 12:36 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:

> Here is the patch for
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46519
>
> We have 2 blocks pointing to each others. This patch first scans
> all blocks without moving vzeroupper so that we can have accurate
> information about upper 128bits at block entry.

This introduces another insn scanning pass, almost the same as
existing vzeroupper pass (modulo CALL_INSN/JUMP_INSN handling).

So, if I understand correctly:
- The patch removes the detection if the function ever touches AVX registers.
- Due to this, all call_insn RTXes have to be decorated with
CALL_NEEDS_VZEROUPPER.
- A new pre-pass is required that scans all functions in order to
detect functions with live AVX registers at exit, and at the same time
marks the functions that *do not* use AVX registers.
- Existing pass then re-scans everything to again detect functions
with live AVX registers at exit and handles vzeroupper emission.

I don't think this approach is acceptable. Maybe a LCM infrastructure
can be used to handle this case?

Uros.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2010-11-18  9:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-11-17  8:34 H.J. Lu
2010-11-17  9:24 ` Uros Bizjak
2010-11-17 15:21   ` H.J. Lu
2010-11-17 20:26     ` Uros Bizjak
2010-11-18  0:49       ` H.J. Lu
2010-11-18  7:06         ` H.J. Lu
2010-11-18  9:23         ` Uros Bizjak
2010-11-18 10:47         ` Uros Bizjak [this message]
2010-11-18 18:38   ` H.J. Lu
2010-11-18 19:27     ` Uros Bizjak
2010-11-18 19:51       ` H.J. Lu
2010-11-18 20:25         ` Uros Bizjak
2010-11-18 20:44           ` H.J. Lu
2010-11-18 22:30           ` Uros Bizjak
2010-11-18 22:33             ` Andrew Pinski
2010-11-18 22:36             ` Jakub Jelinek
2010-11-18 22:55               ` Uros Bizjak
2010-11-18 22:50             ` Richard Henderson
2010-11-18 23:48               ` Uros Bizjak
2010-11-19  0:56                 ` Richard Henderson
2010-11-19  1:15                   ` Uros Bizjak
2010-11-19  9:56             ` Jan Hubicka
2010-11-18 23:09 Steven Bosscher
2010-11-18 23:37 ` Uros Bizjak
2010-11-23 12:42 ` Richard Sandiford
2010-11-23 13:28   ` Steven Bosscher

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='AANLkTi=FsHzQinx2HVrmf94LppvQ3gCd+-8tBrruXGwg@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=ubizjak@gmail.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=hjl.tools@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).