public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>
To: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou@adacore.com>
Cc: "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH, i386]: Extend TARGET_READ_MODIFY{,_WRITE} peepholes to all integer modes
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2016 07:50:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFULd4ZdU2HAi8=m9N7TouJQ81wWOW0EsVs36dRUOTW1gVQM9A@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1744658.Bp6bspGrA0@polaris>

On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou@adacore.com> wrote:
>> While looking at the insn enable condition, I noticed that we don't
>> use "probe_stack" pattern any more, as the stack check loop is now
>> implemented in a different way.
>
> Yes, we do, probe_stack is a standard pattern called by the middle-end.
>
>> 2016-04-28  Uros Bizjak  <ubizjak@gmail.com>
>>
>>     * config/i386/i386.md (peephole2s for operations with memory inputs):
>>     Use SWI mode iterator.
>>     (peephole2s for operations with memory outputs): Ditto.
>>     Do not check for stack checking probe.
>>
>>     (probe_stack): Remove expander.
>>
>> Patch was bootstrapped and regression tested on x86_64-linux-gnu {,-m32}.
>
> How did you test it exactly?
>
>                 === acats tests ===
> FAIL:   c52103x
> FAIL:   c52104x

Apparently without ada...

We can put it back, but prehaps implemented as unspec, so it won't
interfere with peepholes?

Uros.

  reply	other threads:[~2016-04-29  7:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-04-28 19:16 Uros Bizjak
2016-04-29  7:47 ` Eric Botcazou
2016-04-29  7:50   ` Uros Bizjak [this message]
2016-04-29  7:58     ` Eric Botcazou
2016-04-29  9:30       ` Uros Bizjak
2016-04-29 10:17         ` Eric Botcazou
2016-04-29 10:51           ` Uros Bizjak
2016-04-29 11:23             ` Eric Botcazou
2016-04-29 11:52               ` Uros Bizjak
2016-04-29 14:30                 ` Eric Botcazou
2016-04-29 14:44                   ` Uros Bizjak

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='CAFULd4ZdU2HAi8=m9N7TouJQ81wWOW0EsVs36dRUOTW1gVQM9A@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=ubizjak@gmail.com \
    --cc=ebotcazou@adacore.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    /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).