From: Vineet Gupta <vineetg@rivosinc.com>
To: rep.dot.nop@gmail.com, Ajit Agarwal <aagarwa1@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>,
Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>,
Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>,
Peter Bergner <bergner@linux.ibm.com>,
gnu-toolchain <gnu-toolchain@rivosinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 4/4] ree: Improve ree pass for rs6000 target using defined ABI interfaces
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2023 13:49:39 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c1898e4a-8662-4f30-a6bb-92b33b27a3a1@rivosinc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4077DE16-87DA-4DDE-B119-6B516944B632@gmail.com>
On 10/24/23 13:36, rep.dot.nop@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> As said, I don't see why the below was not cleaned up before the V1 submission.
>>>>> Iff it breaks when manually CSEing, I'm curious why?
>>> The function below looks identical in v12 of the patch.
>>> Why didn't you use common subexpressions?
>>> ba
>> Using CSE here breaks aarch64 regressions hence I have reverted it back
>> not to use CSE,
> Just for my own education, can you please paste your patch perusing common subexpressions and an assembly diff of the failing versus working aarch64 testcase, along how you configured that failing (cross-?)compiler and the command-line of a typical testcase that broke when manually CSEing the function below?
I was meaning to ask this before, but what exactly is the CSE issue,
manually or whatever.
-Vineet
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-24 20:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-20 6:50 Ajit Agarwal
2023-10-20 23:56 ` Vineet Gupta
2023-10-21 10:14 ` Ajit Agarwal
2023-10-21 19:26 ` rep.dot.nop
2023-10-23 6:46 ` Ajit Agarwal
2023-10-23 14:10 ` Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
2023-10-24 7:36 ` Ajit Agarwal
2023-10-24 20:36 ` rep.dot.nop
2023-10-24 20:49 ` Vineet Gupta [this message]
2023-10-25 11:11 ` Ajit Agarwal
2023-10-27 17:16 ` Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
2023-10-27 22:39 ` Vineet Gupta
2023-10-28 10:26 ` Ajit Agarwal
2023-10-29 10:49 ` Ajit Agarwal
2023-10-28 10:25 ` Ajit Agarwal
2023-10-29 10:48 ` Ajit Agarwal
2023-10-25 11:08 ` Ajit Agarwal
2023-10-23 18:32 ` Vineet Gupta
2023-10-24 7:40 ` Ajit Agarwal
2023-10-24 9:36 ` Ajit Agarwal
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=c1898e4a-8662-4f30-a6bb-92b33b27a3a1@rivosinc.com \
--to=vineetg@rivosinc.com \
--cc=aagarwa1@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=bergner@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gnu-toolchain@rivosinc.com \
--cc=jeffreyalaw@gmail.com \
--cc=rep.dot.nop@gmail.com \
--cc=richard.guenther@gmail.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).