Hi, Gental ping these patches: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-February/611286.html
BR, Jeff (Jiufu) Jiufu Guo <guoji...@linux.ibm.com> writes: > Hi, > > For a given constant, it would be profitable if we can use 2 insns to build. > This patch enables more constants building through 2 insns: one is "li or > lis", > another is 'rldicl, rldicr or rldic'. > Through checking and analyzing the characters of the insns "li/lis;rldicX", > all the possible constant values are considered by this patch. > > Previously, a patch is posted, but it is too large. > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-September/601276.html > As suggested, I split it into this series. > > Considering the functionality and size, 4 patches are split as below: > 1. Support the constants which can be built by "li;rotldi" > Both positive and negative values from insn "li" are analyzed. > 2. Support the constants which can be built by "lis;rotldi" > We only need to analyze the negative value from "lis". > And this patch uses more code to check leading 1s and tailing 0s from > "lis". > 3. Support the constants which can be built by "li/lis;rldicl/rldicr": > Leverage the APIs defined/analyzed in patches 1 and 2, > this patch checks the characters for the mask of "rldicl/rldicr" > to support more constants. > 4. Support the constants which can be built by "li/lis;rldic": > The mask of "rldic" is relatively complicated, it is analyzed in this > patch to support more constants. > > BR, > Jeff (Jiufu)
