From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 67775 invoked by alias); 29 Apr 2016 07:50:55 -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 67753 invoked by uid 89); 29 Apr 2016 07:50:53 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=c52104x, c52103x X-HELO: mail-yw0-f182.google.com Received: from mail-yw0-f182.google.com (HELO mail-yw0-f182.google.com) (209.85.161.182) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 29 Apr 2016 07:50:42 +0000 Received: by mail-yw0-f182.google.com with SMTP id g133so149781927ywb.2 for ; Fri, 29 Apr 2016 00:50:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=5d+cm5ttwZ5JQMsSOH4GWoK0jha/jNjZMWIxE1N5tJU=; b=XMweYgWloFodboMSgzMHpiE5rGZOdnNY79H3fpMy+4E2DdRYN6yKDj8fco+esM/HzD HIRcXDOzHDMtoh0VAk58AafZmP80bfhJqqvro/qzr1TWVd1mzV7OVBkKpDzCqkL+I8TW +2G/NLNTpob6AjWL/TCuijsWzESs2FPk4KJCzwWqp4JztQzdVKXzYY/AXBLYQiBLF8Ju Jwmu59tz+077A/Sf27Q/yzZhMPysTCYnaHfeV0Ato2Zee0yTWLrldr7mp2yP/Xb3R+d2 7iL8nATG9JSmKcL08G6sDroG+hQDQ5OOMhXoPckc7amw2sJBoOyUCMMtyM8/WVGjcUAD yl4g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FU6sDZhoC8TQr3yGRx1UsthEdopWoF7yc8EtRIfDvI1rxxu67a7qT3F57RQB0FIFO8mO/+sWxfHHELuVg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.176.64.40 with SMTP id h37mr10569568uad.58.1461916239507; Fri, 29 Apr 2016 00:50:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.103.76.220 with HTTP; Fri, 29 Apr 2016 00:50:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1744658.Bp6bspGrA0@polaris> References: <1744658.Bp6bspGrA0@polaris> Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2016 07:50:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH, i386]: Extend TARGET_READ_MODIFY{,_WRITE} peepholes to all integer modes From: Uros Bizjak To: Eric Botcazou Cc: "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-SW-Source: 2016-04/txt/msg01937.txt.bz2 On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Eric Botcazou 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 >> >> * 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.