Re: [patch][x86] -march=icelake

[Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Koval, Julia <julia.koval@intel.com> wrote:
>>> Maybe [] operator could be used instead of a dynamic handling here.
> I had another solution in mind, with enums, which then addresses elements using its index, please look the patch attached.
>
>
>>>> The natural GCC data structure is a sbitmap ...  I'd rather not use <bitset> given we have a GCC variant.
>
> Sorry for maybe stupid question, but how do we set
>
>   bitmask pta_core2          = pta_64bit | pta_mmx | pta_sse | pta_sse2
>                                | pta_sse3 | pta_ssse3 | pta_cx16 | pta_fxsr;
>
> in sbitmap, except chain of bitmap_and_or with third bitmap set to ones(which doesn't look fast)?
> Sorry, I think there should be some obvious solution, but can't find a proper function.

Chain of bitmap_set_bit () I'd say.  Or are the pta_64bit and friends
bitsets themselves?

Richard.

> Thanks,
> Julia
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Richard Biener [mailto:richard.guenther@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2017 12:56 PM
>> To: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>
>> Cc: Koval, Julia <julia.koval@intel.com>; GCC Patches <gcc-
>> patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Kirill Yukhin <kirill.yukhin@gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: [patch][x86] -march=icelake
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 9:29 AM, Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 2:42 PM, Koval, Julia <julia.koval@intel.com> wrote:
>> >> Hi, I tried to replace 2 flags variable with c++ bitset(in patch attached). What
>> do you think?
>> >
>> > Hm, I'm not a c++ person, but I wonder about overhead and performance
>> > impact of this change. Maybe [] operator could be used instead of a
>> > dynamic handling here. Please discuss with a c++ person to find out
>> > the most appropriate approach.
>>
>> The natural GCC data structure is a sbitmap ...  I'd rather not use <bitset>
>> given we have a GCC variant.
>>
>> >>> Please add these options first.
>> >> 2 options left(they are under Kirill's review currently), I'll add PTAs for them to
>> the patch, as soon as they will be commited.
>> >
>> > Actually, let's wait for these 2 options to be reviewed and committed
>> > first, and after that introduce -march=icelake handling.
>> >
>> > Uros.