From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21912 invoked by alias); 7 Dec 2018 15:52:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 21902 invoked by uid 89); 7 Dec 2018 15:52:26 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-26.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,GIT_PATCH_0,GIT_PATCH_1,GIT_PATCH_2,GIT_PATCH_3,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=gpi, ulc, rejects, Prefer X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 07 Dec 2018 15:52:24 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7CEB74E92A; Fri, 7 Dec 2018 15:52:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (ovpn-112-17.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.112.17]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F2965DD85; Fri, 7 Dec 2018 15:52:22 +0000 (UTC) From: Jeff Law Openpgp: preference=signencrypt To: gcc-patches , Richard Earnshaw , James Greenhalgh Subject: [RFA] [target/87369] Prefer "bit" over "bfxil" Message-ID: Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2018 15:52:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------6AA6F2A56A420A004074F96F" X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2018-12/txt/msg00474.txt.bz2 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------6AA6F2A56A420A004074F96F Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-length: 905 As I suggested in the BZ, this patch rejects constants with just the high bit set for the recently added "bfxil" pattern. As a result we'll return to using "bit" for the test in the BZ. I'm not versed enough in aarch64 performance tuning to know if "bit" is actually a better choice than "bfxil". "bit" results in better code for the testcase, but that seems more a function of register allocation than "bit" being inherently better than "bfxil". Obviously someone with more aarch64 knowledge needs to make a decision here. My first iteration of the patch changed "aarch64_high_bits_all_ones_p". We could still go that way too, though the name probably needs to change. I've bootstrapped and regression tested on aarch64-linux-gnu and it fixes the regression. I've also bootstrapped aarch64_be-linux-gnu, but haven't done any kind of regression tested on that platform. OK for the trunk? Jeff --------------6AA6F2A56A420A004074F96F Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; name="P" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline; filename="P" Content-length: 1432 CVBSIHRhcmdldC84NzM2OQoJKiBjb25maWcvYWFyY2g2NC9hYXJjaDY0Lm1k IChhYXJjaDY0X2JmeGlsPG1vZGU+KTogRG8gbm90IGFjY2VwdAoJY29uc3Rh bnQgd2l0aCBqdXN0IHRoZSBoaWdoIGJpdCBzZXQuICBUaGF0J3MgYmV0dGVy IGhhbmRsZWQgYnkKCXRoZSAiYml0IiBwYXR0ZXJuLgoKZGlmZiAtLWdpdCBh L2djYy9jb25maWcvYWFyY2g2NC9hYXJjaDY0Lm1kIGIvZ2NjL2NvbmZpZy9h YXJjaDY0L2FhcmNoNjQubWQKaW5kZXggODhmNjYxMDRkYjMuLmFkNjgyMjQx MGMyIDEwMDY0NAotLS0gYS9nY2MvY29uZmlnL2FhcmNoNjQvYWFyY2g2NC5t ZAorKysgYi9nY2MvY29uZmlnL2FhcmNoNjQvYWFyY2g2NC5tZApAQCAtNTM0 Miw5ICs1MzQyLDExIEBACiAJCSAgICAobWF0Y2hfb3BlcmFuZDpHUEkgMyAi Y29uc3RfaW50X29wZXJhbmQiICJuLCBVbGMiKSkKIAkgICAgKGFuZDpHUEkg KG1hdGNoX29wZXJhbmQ6R1BJIDIgInJlZ2lzdGVyX29wZXJhbmQiICIwLHIi KQogCQkgICAgKG1hdGNoX29wZXJhbmQ6R1BJIDQgImNvbnN0X2ludF9vcGVy YW5kIiAiVWxjLCBuIikpKSldCi0gICIoSU5UVkFMIChvcGVyYW5kc1szXSkg PT0gfklOVFZBTCAob3BlcmFuZHNbNF0pKQotICAmJiAoYWFyY2g2NF9oaWdo X2JpdHNfYWxsX29uZXNfcCAoSU5UVkFMIChvcGVyYW5kc1szXSkpCi0gICAg fHwgYWFyY2g2NF9oaWdoX2JpdHNfYWxsX29uZXNfcCAoSU5UVkFMIChvcGVy YW5kc1s0XSkpKSIKKyAgIihJTlRWQUwgKG9wZXJhbmRzWzNdKSA9PSB+SU5U VkFMIChvcGVyYW5kc1s0XSkKKyAgICAmJiAoKGFhcmNoNjRfaGlnaF9iaXRz X2FsbF9vbmVzX3AgKElOVFZBTCAob3BlcmFuZHNbM10pKQorCSAmJiBwb3Bj b3VudF9od2kgKElOVFZBTCAob3BlcmFuZHNbM10pKSAhPSAxKQorICAgICAg ICB8fCAoYWFyY2g2NF9oaWdoX2JpdHNfYWxsX29uZXNfcCAoSU5UVkFMIChv cGVyYW5kc1s0XSkpCisJICAgICYmIHBvcGNvdW50X2h3aSAoSU5UVkFMIChv cGVyYW5kc1s0XSkpICE9IDEpKSkiCiAgIHsKICAgICBzd2l0Y2ggKHdoaWNo X2FsdGVybmF0aXZlKQogICAgIHsK --------------6AA6F2A56A420A004074F96F--