public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
To: "Li, Pan2" <pan2.li@intel.com>
Cc: Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>,
	Kito Cheng <kito.cheng@gmail.com>,
	 "juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai" <juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai>,
	 "richard.sandiford" <richard.sandiford@arm.com>,
	 gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
	palmer <palmer@dabbelt.com>,  jakub <jakub@redhat.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] machine_mode type size: Extend enum size from 8-bit to 16-bit
Date: Mon, 8 May 2023 07:37:30 +0000 (UTC)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <nycvar.YFH.7.77.849.2305080729220.4723@jbgna.fhfr.qr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <MW5PR11MB590882DC709DED86ADA637D3A9719@MW5PR11MB5908.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>

On Mon, 8 May 2023, Li, Pan2 wrote:

> return !dv || (int) GET_CODE ((rtx) dv) != (int) VALUE; } is able to fix 
> this ICE after mode bits change.

Can you check which bits this will inspect when 'dv' is a tree after your
patch?  VALUE is 1 and would map to IDENTIFIER_NODE on the tree side
when there was a 1:1 overlap.

I think for all cases but struct loc_exp_dep we could find a bit to
record wheter we deal with a VALUE or a decl, but for loc_exp_dep
it's going to be difficult (unless we start to take bits from
pointer representations).

That said, I agree with Jeff that the code is ugly, but a simplistic
conversion isn't what we want.

An alternative "solution" might be to also shrink tree_code when
we shrink rtx_code and keep the 1:1 overlap.

Richard.

> I will re-trigger the memory allocate 
> bytes test with below changes for X86.
> 
> rtx_def code 16 => 8 bits.
> rtx_def mode 8 => 16 bits.
> tree_base code unchanged.
> 
> Pan
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Li, Pan2 
> Sent: Monday, May 8, 2023 2:42 PM
> To: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>; Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>
> Cc: Kito Cheng <kito.cheng@gmail.com>; juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai; richard.sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>; gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; palmer <palmer@dabbelt.com>; jakub <jakub@redhat.com>
> Subject: RE: [PATCH] machine_mode type size: Extend enum size from 8-bit to 16-bit
> 
> Oops. Actually I am patching a version as you mentioned like storage allocation. Thank you Richard, will try your suggestion and keep you posted.
> 
> Pan
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
> Sent: Monday, May 8, 2023 2:30 PM
> To: Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>
> Cc: Li, Pan2 <pan2.li@intel.com>; Kito Cheng <kito.cheng@gmail.com>; juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai; richard.sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>; gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; palmer <palmer@dabbelt.com>; jakub <jakub@redhat.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] machine_mode type size: Extend enum size from 8-bit to 16-bit
> 
> On Sun, 7 May 2023, Jeff Law wrote:
> 
> > 
> > 
> > On 5/6/23 19:55, Li, Pan2 wrote:
> > > It looks like we cannot simply swap the code and mode in rtx_def, 
> > > the code may have to be the same bits as the tree_code in tree_base.
> > > Or we will meet ICE like below.
> > > 
> > > rtx_def code 16 => 8 bits.
> > > rtx_def mode 8 => 16 bits.
> > > 
> > > static inline decl_or_value
> > > dv_from_value (rtx value)
> > > {
> > >    decl_or_value dv;
> > >    dv = value;
> > >    gcc_checking_assert (dv_is_value_p (dv));  <=  ICE
> > >    return dv;
> > Ugh.  We really just need to fix this code.  It assumes particular 
> > structure layouts and that's just wrong/dumb.
> 
> Well, it's a neat trick ... we just need to adjust it to
> 
> static inline bool
> dv_is_decl_p (decl_or_value dv)
> {
>   return !dv || (int) GET_CODE ((rtx) dv) != (int) VALUE; }  
> 
> I think (and hope for the 'decl' case the bits inspected are never 'VALUE').  Of course the above stinks from a TBAA perspective ...
> 
> Any "real" fix would require allocating storage for a discriminator and thus hurt the resource constrained var-tracking a lot.
> 
> Richard.
> 

-- 
Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Frankenstrasse 146, 90461 Nuernberg,
Germany; GF: Ivo Totev, Andrew Myers, Andrew McDonald, Boudien Moerman;
HRB 36809 (AG Nuernberg)

  reply	other threads:[~2023-05-08  7:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 63+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-04-10 14:48 juzhe.zhong
2023-04-10 14:54 ` Jeff Law
2023-04-10 15:02   ` juzhe.zhong
2023-04-10 15:14   ` juzhe.zhong
2023-04-11  9:16     ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-04-11  9:46       ` juzhe.zhong
2023-04-11 10:11         ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-04-11 10:25           ` juzhe.zhong
2023-04-11 10:52             ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-04-11  9:46     ` Richard Sandiford
2023-04-11  9:59       ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-04-11 10:11         ` juzhe.zhong
2023-04-11 10:05       ` Richard Earnshaw
2023-04-11 10:15         ` Richard Sandiford
2023-04-11 10:59       ` Richard Biener
2023-04-11 11:11         ` Richard Sandiford
2023-04-11 11:19           ` juzhe.zhong
2023-04-11 13:50             ` Kito Cheng
2023-04-12  7:53               ` Richard Biener
2023-04-12  9:06                 ` Kito Cheng
2023-04-12  9:21                   ` Richard Biener
2023-04-12  9:31                     ` Kito Cheng
2023-04-12 23:22                       ` 钟居哲
2023-04-13 13:06                         ` Richard Sandiford
2023-04-13 14:02                           ` Richard Biener
2023-04-15  2:58                             ` Hans-Peter Nilsson
2023-04-17  6:38                               ` Richard Biener
2023-04-20  5:37                                 ` Hans-Peter Nilsson
2023-05-05  1:43                         ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-05  6:25                           ` Richard Biener
2023-05-06  1:10                             ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-06  1:53                               ` Kito Cheng
2023-05-06  1:59                                 ` juzhe.zhong
2023-05-06  2:12                                   ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-06  2:18                                     ` Kito Cheng
2023-05-06  2:20                                       ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-06  2:48                                         ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-07  1:55                                           ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-07 15:23                                             ` Jeff Law
2023-05-08  1:07                                               ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-08  6:29                                               ` Richard Biener
2023-05-08  6:41                                                 ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-08  6:59                                                   ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-08  7:37                                                     ` Richard Biener [this message]
2023-05-08  8:05                                                       ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-09  6:13                                                         ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-09  7:04                                                           ` Richard Biener
2023-05-09 10:16                                                         ` Richard Sandiford
2023-05-09 10:26                                                           ` Richard Biener
2023-05-09 11:50                                                             ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-10  5:09                                                               ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-10  7:22                                                                 ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-08  1:35                                         ` Li, Pan2
2023-04-10 15:18   ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-04-10 15:22     ` juzhe.zhong
2023-04-10 20:42       ` Jeff Law
2023-04-10 23:03         ` juzhe.zhong
2023-04-11  1:36         ` juzhe.zhong
     [not found]     ` <20230410232205400970205@rivai.ai>
2023-04-10 15:33       ` juzhe.zhong
2023-04-10 20:39         ` Jeff Law
2023-04-10 20:36     ` Jeff Law
2023-04-10 22:53       ` juzhe.zhong
2023-04-10 15:10 ` Jakub Jelinek

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=nycvar.YFH.7.77.849.2305080729220.4723@jbgna.fhfr.qr \
    --to=rguenther@suse.de \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=jakub@redhat.com \
    --cc=jeffreyalaw@gmail.com \
    --cc=juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai \
    --cc=kito.cheng@gmail.com \
    --cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
    --cc=pan2.li@intel.com \
    --cc=richard.sandiford@arm.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).