From: Richard Guenther <rguenther@suse.de>
To: Steven Bosscher <stevenb.gcc@gmail.com>
Cc: "William J. Schmidt" <wschmidt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, bergner@vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add flag to control straight-line strength reduction
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 09:01:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1207181059280.17088@jbgna.fhfr.qr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABu31nMFyB7ioMSrEyt+Y3yzKWXuKTj2s0zFkyDLe0vqha5xdQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 9:59 AM, Richard Guenther <rguenther@suse.de> wrote:
> > On Tue, 17 Jul 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> >
> >> I overlooked adding a pass-control flag for strength reduction, added
> >> here. I named it -ftree-slsr for consistency with other -ftree- flags,
> >> but could change it to -fgimple-slsr if you prefer that for a pass named
> >> gimple-ssa-...
> >>
> >> Bootstrapped and tested on powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu with no new
> >> regressions. Ok for trunk?
> >
> > The switch needs documentation in doc/invoke.texi. Other than that
> > it's fine to stick with -ftree-..., even that exposes details to our
> > users that are not necessary (RTL passes didn't have -frtl-... either).
> > So in the end, why not re-use -fstrength-reduce that is already available
> > (but stubbed out)?
>
> In the past, -fstrength-reduce applied to loop strength reduction in
> loop.c. I don't think it should be re-used for a completely different
> code transformation.
Ok. I suppose -ftree-slsr is ok then.
Thanks,
Richard.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-18 9:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-17 15:46 William J. Schmidt
2012-07-18 7:59 ` Richard Guenther
2012-07-18 8:11 ` Steven Bosscher
2012-07-18 9:01 ` Richard Guenther [this message]
2012-07-18 13:25 ` William J. Schmidt
2012-07-18 13:29 ` William J. Schmidt
2012-07-18 14:15 ` Steven Bosscher
2012-07-18 14:36 ` Richard Guenther
2012-07-18 14:00 ` William J. Schmidt
2012-07-18 14:35 ` Richard Guenther
2012-07-18 9:02 ` Eric Botcazou
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=alpine.LNX.2.00.1207181059280.17088@jbgna.fhfr.qr \
--to=rguenther@suse.de \
--cc=bergner@vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=stevenb.gcc@gmail.com \
--cc=wschmidt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/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).