From: Kai Tietz <ktietz70@googlemail.com>
To: Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com>
Cc: Kai Tietz <ktietz@redhat.com>, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [patch tree-optimization]: allow branch-cost optimization for truth-and/or on mode-expanded simple boolean-operands
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 12:40:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAEwic4YNAWFfZRpSS6TRN3tgzuPf5KTpM3=Su_Vfx5hst+V5Fw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFiYyc3jH-_pKHxfCjdP80jQ52+b4mfaJs47_WzcYMuwLttg8Q@mail.gmail.com>
2011/10/21 Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 3:08 PM, Kai Tietz <ktietz@redhat.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> this patch re-enables the branch-cost optimization on simple boolean-typed operands, which are casted to a wider integral type. This happens due casts from
>> boolean-types are preserved, but FE might expands simple-expression to wider mode.
>>
>> I added two tests for already working branch-cost optimization for IA-architecture and
>> two for explicit checking for boolean-type.
>>
>> ChangeLog
>>
>> 2011-10-20 Kai Tietz <ktietz@redhat.com>
>>
>> * fold-const.c (simple_operand_p_2): Handle integral
>> casts from boolean-operands.
>>
>> 2011-10-20 Kai Tietz <ktietz@redhat.com>
>>
>> * gcc.target/i386/branch-cost1.c: New test.
>> * gcc.target/i386/branch-cost2.c: New test.
>> * gcc.target/i386/branch-cost3.c: New test.
>> * gcc.target/i386/branch-cost4.c: New test.
>>
>> Bootstrapped and regression tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu for all languages including Ada and Obj-C++. Ok for apply?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Kai
>>
>> Index: gcc-head/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/branch-cost2.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ gcc-head/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/branch-cost2.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
>> +/* { dg-do compile } */
>> +/* { dg-options "-O2 -fdump-tree-gimple -mbranch-cost=2" } */
>> +
>> +extern int doo (void);
>> +
>> +int
>> +foo (int a, int b)
>> +{
>> + if (a && b)
>> + return doo ();
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "if " 1 "gimple" } } */
>> +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times " & " 1 "gimple" } } */
>> +/* { dg-final { cleanup-tree-dump "gimple" } } */
>> Index: gcc-head/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/branch-cost3.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ gcc-head/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/branch-cost3.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
>> +/* { dg-do compile } */
>> +/* { dg-options "-O2 -fdump-tree-gimple -mbranch-cost=2" } */
>> +
>> +extern int doo (void);
>> +
>> +int
>> +foo (_Bool a, _Bool b)
>> +{
>> + if (a && b)
>> + return doo ();
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "if " 1 "gimple" } } */
>> +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times " & " 1 "gimple" } } */
>> +/* { dg-final { cleanup-tree-dump "gimple" } } */
>> Index: gcc-head/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/branch-cost4.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ gcc-head/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/branch-cost4.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
>> +/* { dg-do compile } */
>> +/* { dg-options "-O2 -fdump-tree-gimple -mbranch-cost=0" } */
>> +
>> +extern int doo (void);
>> +
>> +int
>> +foo (_Bool a, _Bool b)
>> +{
>> + if (a && b)
>> + return doo ();
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "if " 2 "gimple" } } */
>> +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-not " & " "gimple" } } */
>> +/* { dg-final { cleanup-tree-dump "gimple" } } */
>> Index: gcc-head/gcc/fold-const.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- gcc-head.orig/gcc/fold-const.c
>> +++ gcc-head/gcc/fold-const.c
>> @@ -3706,6 +3706,19 @@ simple_operand_p_2 (tree exp)
>> /* Strip any conversions that don't change the machine mode. */
>> STRIP_NOPS (exp);
>>
>> + /* Handle integral widening casts from boolean-typed
>> + expressions as simple. This happens due casts from
>> + boolean-types are preserved, but FE might expands
>> + simple-expression to wider mode. */
>> + if (INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (exp))
>> + && CONVERT_EXPR_P (exp)
>> + && TREE_CODE (TREE_TYPE (TREE_OPERAND (exp, 0)))
>> + == BOOLEAN_TYPE)
>> + {
>> + exp = TREE_OPERAND (exp, 0);
>> + STRIP_NOPS (exp);
>> + }
>> +
>
> Huh, well. I think the above is just too special and you instead should
> replace the existing STRIP_NOPS by
>
> while (CONVERT_EXPR_P (exp))
> exp = TREE_OPERAND (exp, 0);
>
> with a comment that conversions are considered simple.
>
> Ok with that change, if it bootstraps & tests ok.
>
> Richard.
Ok, bootstrapped and regression-tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu and
applied to trunk with modifying as you suggested.
One question I have about handling of TRUTH-binaries in general in
fold-const.c. Why aren't we enforcing already here in fold_binary for
those operations, that operands get boolean-type? I see here some
advantages of C-AST folding. I've tested it and saw that even later
in SSA-passes we get slightly better results on that.
Regards,
Kai
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-10-21 12:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <7d649d85-73fa-4c37-bd6e-d3527500196b@zmail14.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com>
2011-10-20 14:25 ` Kai Tietz
2011-10-21 9:52 ` Richard Guenther
2011-10-21 12:40 ` Kai Tietz [this message]
2011-10-23 10:11 ` Richard Guenther
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='CAEwic4YNAWFfZRpSS6TRN3tgzuPf5KTpM3=Su_Vfx5hst+V5Fw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=ktietz70@googlemail.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=ktietz@redhat.com \
--cc=richard.guenther@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).