From: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>
To: "Paulo J. Matos" <paulo@matos-sorge.com>
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Expanding instructions with condition codes inter-deps
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2011 00:13:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4EA1E726.6090204@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <j7s9am$tp3$1@dough.gmane.org>
On 10/21/2011 10:15 AM, Paulo J. Matos wrote:
> So I have implemented the nadd and addc as:
>
> (define_insn "negqi2"
> [(set (match_operand:QI 0 "register_operand" "=c")
> (neg:QI (match_operand:QI 1 "register_operand" "0")))
> (set (reg:CC_C RCC) (eq (match_dup 1) (const_int 0)))
> (clobber (reg:CC RCC))]
> ""
> {
> operands[2] = const0_rtx;
> return "nadd\\t%0,%2";
> })
There are lots of parts of the compiler that don't optimize well when an
insn has more than one output. For the normal insn, just clobber the flags;
don't include a second SET.
> (define_insn "addc_internal"
> [(set (match_operand:QI 0 "nonimmediate_operand" "=c")
> (plus:QI
> (plus:QI
> (ltu:QI (reg:CC RCC) (const_int 0))
> (match_operand:QI 1 "nonimmediate_operand" "%0"))
> (match_operand:QI 2 "general_operand" "cwmi")))
> (use (reg:CC_C RCC))
> (clobber (reg:CC RCC))]
> ""
> "addc\\t%0,%f2")
You don't need the USE, because you mention RCC inside the LTU.
> (define_insn "*addc_internal_flags"
Likewise.
> A couple of things to note:
> * negqi (which generates the nadd x, y equivalent to -x + y) has a
> set RCC in C mode followed by a clobber. The set in C mode doesn't
> show up in the _flags variant which is used only for the compare-elim
> since it doesn't really matter and it already contains a set RCC
> anyway.
Surely the NADD insn is simply a normal subtract (with reversed operands).
You shouldn't *need* to implement NEG at all, as the middle-end will let
NEG expand via MINUS.
Just so you know...
> * is this enough for GCC to understand that anything that clobbers
> RCC or specifically touches the RCC in C mode shouldn't go in between
> these two instructions?
Yes.
> Also, do I need to specify in the RCC
> clobber, exactly which flags are clobbered, or should I use a set
> instead?
No, the compiler will assume the entire register is changed, no matter
what CCmode you place there.
> * in the case of using sets, it was easy in the case of the negqi of
> findind the source of the set RCC, however, it's not so easy for the
> general case. Is unspec the answer? Is unspec the way of saying:
> "hey, I am setting RCC in Cmode here, you shouldn't bother about the
> value that I put there. Just know that RCC is going to be set."
You can often just use (compare x y) as well, assuming that the flags
are set "appropriately". GCC doesn't assume anything about the
contents of the intermediate CCmode object, but does assume that
(lt (compare x y) (const_int 0))
produces the same value as
(lt x y)
But, yes, if there's no obvious comparison, then unspec is ok.
r~
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-10-21 21:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-10-17 15:58 Paulo J. Matos
2011-10-17 17:23 ` Andrew Pinski
2011-10-18 13:44 ` Paulo J. Matos
2011-10-19 5:22 ` Richard Henderson
2011-10-19 5:45 ` Paul_Koning
[not found] ` <CAPOJ94M2XrqM_kG98v1dC1=K2fEkHpuNLSkZBrQyzJ9ncmaQXg@mail.gmail.com>
2011-10-21 20:57 ` Richard Henderson
2011-10-21 21:42 ` Paulo J. Matos
2011-10-22 0:13 ` Richard Henderson [this message]
2011-10-22 5:13 ` Peter Bigot
2011-10-22 5:21 ` Paul_Koning
2011-10-24 7:04 ` Richard Henderson
2011-10-24 12:12 ` Paulo J. Matos
2011-10-24 12:07 ` Paulo J. Matos
2011-10-20 12:46 ` Paulo J. Matos
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=4EA1E726.6090204@redhat.com \
--to=rth@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=paulo@matos-sorge.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).