From: Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>
To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>,
Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>,
Eric Botcazou <botcazou@adacore.com>,
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>,
Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] combine, v3: Fix AND handling for WORD_REGISTER_OPERATIONS targets [PR109040]
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2023 08:17:46 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a5c42750-edbd-49a1-b440-36696ad4fafc@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZDaBpPyA/XiPOvjw@tucnak>
On 4/12/23 04:02, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 08:21:26AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
>> I would have expected something like
>> WORD_REGISTER_OPERATIONS && known_le (GET_MODE_PRECISION (mode), BITS_PER_WORD)
>> as the condition to use word_mode, rather than just
>> WORD_REGISTER_OPERATIONS. In both spots. Because larger modes should be
>> used as is, not a narrower word_mode instead of them.
>
> In patch form that would be following (given that the combine.cc change
> had scalar_int_mode mode we can as well just use normal comparison, and
> simplify-rtx.cc has it guarded on HWI_COMPUTABLE_MODE_P, which is also only
> true for scalar int modes).
>
> I've tried the pr108947.c testcase, but I see no differences in the assembly
> before/after the patch (but dunno if I'm using the right options).
> The pr109040.c testcase from the patch I don't see the expected zero
> extension without the patch and do see it with it.
>
> As before, I can only test this easily on non-WORD_REGISTER_OPERATIONS
> targets.
>
> 2023-04-12 Jeff Law <jlaw@ventanamicro.com>
> Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
>
> PR target/109040
> * combine.cc (simplify_and_const_int_1): Compute nonzero_bits in
> word_mode rather than mode if WORD_REGISTER_OPERATIONS and mode is
> smaller than word_mode.
> * simplify-rtx.cc (simplify_context::simplify_binary_operation_1)
> <case AND>: Likewise.
>
> * gcc.c-torture/execute/pr109040.c: New test.
Looks pretty sensible. It'll take most of the day, but I'll do a
bootstrap and regression test with this variant.
jeff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-12 14:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-05 9:16 [PATCH] dse: Handle SUBREGs of word REGs differently " Jakub Jelinek
2023-04-05 13:14 ` Jeff Law
2023-04-05 14:51 ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-04-05 16:17 ` Jeff Law
2023-04-05 16:48 ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-04-05 17:31 ` Jeff Law
2023-04-06 9:31 ` Richard Sandiford
2023-04-06 9:37 ` Li, Pan2
2023-04-06 14:49 ` Jeff Law
2023-04-06 14:45 ` Jeff Law
2023-04-06 10:15 ` Eric Botcazou
2023-04-06 10:31 ` [PATCH] combine: Fix simplify_comparison AND handling " Jakub Jelinek
2023-04-06 10:51 ` Eric Botcazou
2023-04-06 11:37 ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-04-06 14:21 ` Eric Botcazou
2023-04-09 0:25 ` Jeff Law
2023-04-10 7:10 ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-04-12 1:26 ` Jeff Law
2023-04-12 6:21 ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-04-12 10:02 ` [PATCH] combine, v3: Fix " Jakub Jelinek
2023-04-12 14:17 ` Jeff Law [this message]
2023-04-12 14:30 ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-04-12 15:24 ` Segher Boessenkool
2023-04-12 16:58 ` [PATCH] combine, v4: " Jakub Jelinek
2023-04-13 4:05 ` Jeff Law
2023-04-13 10:57 ` Segher Boessenkool
2023-04-13 12:35 ` Jeff Law
2023-04-13 13:45 ` [PATCH] loop-iv: Fix up bounds computation Jakub Jelinek
2023-04-13 15:07 ` Jeff Law
2023-04-13 19:37 ` Jeff Law
2023-04-12 13:29 ` [PATCH] combine: Fix simplify_comparison AND handling for WORD_REGISTER_OPERATIONS targets [PR109040] Jeff Law
2023-04-09 1:15 ` Jeff Law
2023-04-10 5:13 ` Hongtao Liu
2023-04-10 5:15 ` Hongtao Liu
2023-04-06 14:35 ` Jeff Law
2023-04-06 15:06 ` Jeff Law
2023-04-06 14:53 ` [PATCH] dse: Handle SUBREGs of word REGs differently " Jeff Law
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=a5c42750-edbd-49a1-b440-36696ad4fafc@gmail.com \
--to=jeffreyalaw@gmail.com \
--cc=botcazou@adacore.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=rguenther@suse.de \
--cc=richard.sandiford@arm.com \
--cc=segher@kernel.crashing.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).