From: Tamar Christina <Tamar.Christina@arm.com>
To: Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>,
"gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Cc: nd <nd@arm.com>, "rguenther@suse.de" <rguenther@suse.de>,
"aldyh@redhat.com" <aldyh@redhat.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/2]middle-end: Add new tbranch optab to add support for bit-test-and-branch operations
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2022 09:55:11 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <VI1PR08MB532552D4EEC4D6ADBDE09B80FF399@VI1PR08MB5325.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c71ccdf6-7baf-0896-e769-0b65614d763c@gmail.com>
Hi Aldy,
I'm trying to use Ranger to determine if a range of an expression is a single bit.
If possible in case of a mask then also the position of the bit that's being checked by the mask (or the mask itself).
Do you have any pointers/existing code I can look at to do this?
Kind regards,
Tamar
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2022 5:00 PM
> To: Tamar Christina <Tamar.Christina@arm.com>; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: nd <nd@arm.com>; rguenther@suse.de
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2]middle-end: Add new tbranch optab to add support
> for bit-test-and-branch operations
>
>
> On 11/1/22 09:53, Tamar Christina wrote:
> >>
> >>> from the machine description.
> >>>
> >>> +@cindex @code{tbranch@var{mode}4} instruction pattern @item
> >>> +@samp{tbranch@var{mode}4} Conditional branch instruction
> combined
> >>> +with a bit test-and-compare instruction. Operand 0 is a comparison
> >>> +operator. Operand 1 is the operand of the comparison. Operand 2 is
> >>> +the bit position of Operand 1 to test.
> >>> +Operand 3 is the @code{code_label} to jump to.
> >> Should we refine/document the set of comparison operators allowed?
> >> Is operand 1 an arbitrary RTL expression or more limited? I'm
> >> guessing its relatively arbitrary given how you've massaged the
> >> existing branch-on-bit patterns from the aarch backend.
> > It can be any expression in theory. However in practical terms we
> > usually force the values to registers before calling the expansion.
> > My assumption is that this is for CSE purposes but that's only a guess.
>
> Understood. And generally yes, forcing expressions into regs is good for CSE.
>
>
> >
> >> Do we have enough information lying around from Ranger to avoid the
> need
> >> to walk the def-use chain to discover that we're masking off all but one
> bit?
> >>
> > That's an interesting thought. I'll try to see if I can figure out how to query
> > Ranger here. It would be nice to do so here.
>
> Reach out to Aldy, I suspect he can probably give you the necessary
> pseudocode pretty quickly.
>
>
> Jeff
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-02 9:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-31 11:53 Tamar Christina
2022-10-31 11:53 ` [PATCH 2/2]AArch64 Support new tbranch optab Tamar Christina
2022-11-14 15:58 ` Tamar Christina
2022-11-15 10:36 ` Richard Sandiford
2022-11-15 10:42 ` Tamar Christina
2022-11-15 10:50 ` Richard Sandiford
2022-11-15 11:00 ` Tamar Christina
2022-11-15 11:14 ` Richard Sandiford
2022-11-15 11:23 ` Tamar Christina
2022-11-15 11:33 ` Richard Sandiford
2022-11-15 11:39 ` Tamar Christina
2022-11-22 13:48 ` Tamar Christina
2022-11-22 14:00 ` Richard Sandiford
2022-11-24 12:18 ` Tamar Christina
2022-12-01 16:44 ` Tamar Christina
2022-12-05 14:06 ` Richard Sandiford
2022-10-31 11:54 ` [PATCH]AArch64 Extend umov and sbfx patterns Tamar Christina
2022-10-31 12:26 ` Richard Sandiford
2022-11-11 14:42 ` Tamar Christina
2022-11-15 11:10 ` Richard Sandiford
2022-10-31 21:16 ` [PATCH 1/2]middle-end: Add new tbranch optab to add support for bit-test-and-branch operations Jeff Law
2022-11-01 15:53 ` Tamar Christina
2022-11-01 17:00 ` Jeff Law
2022-11-02 9:55 ` Tamar Christina [this message]
2022-11-02 11:08 ` Aldy Hernandez
2022-11-05 14:23 ` Richard Biener
2022-11-14 15:56 ` Tamar Christina
2022-11-14 16:22 ` Jeff Law
2022-11-15 7:33 ` Richard Biener
2022-12-01 16:29 ` Tamar Christina
2022-12-02 7:09 ` Richard Biener
2022-12-05 12:00 ` Richard Sandiford
2022-12-05 13:14 ` Richard Sandiford
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=VI1PR08MB532552D4EEC4D6ADBDE09B80FF399@VI1PR08MB5325.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com \
--to=tamar.christina@arm.com \
--cc=aldyh@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jeffreyalaw@gmail.com \
--cc=nd@arm.com \
--cc=rguenther@suse.de \
/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).