On 11/28/18 14:37, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 9:47 AM Michael Eager <ea...@eagerm.com> wrote:

On 11/28/18 09:10, Jeff Law wrote:
On 11/28/18 10:00 AM, Michael Eager wrote:
I have a small test case which generates poor quality code on my target.
Here is the original:

    if (cond1 == 2048 || cond2 == 8)
      {
        x = x + y;
      }
    return x;

This ends up generating a series of instructions to compute a flag with
the result of the condition followed by a single compare with zero and
a jump.  Better code would be two compares and two jumps.

The gimple is

    _1 = cond1 == 2048;
    _2 = cond2 == 8;
    _3 = _1 | _2;
    if (_3 != 0) goto <D.1464>; else goto <D.1465>;
...

so this poor code sequence is essentially a correct translation.

On MIPS, for the same test case, the gimple is different:

    if (cond1 == 2048) goto <D.1491>; else goto <D.1493>;
    <D.1493>:
    if (cond2 == 8) goto <D.1491>; else goto <D.1492>;
    <D.1491>:
...

which generates the better code sequence.

Can someone give me a pointer where to find where the lowering
pass decides to break up a condition into multiple tests?  Is
there a target configuration option which I have overlooked or
maybe set incorrectly?
BRANCH_COST, which comes into play during generation of the initial
trees as well in passes which try to optimize branchy code into
straighter code.

Thanks.  I did look at BRANCH_COST, and played with the values, but it
didn't seem to have any affect.  I'll take a closer look.

Look at LOGICAL_OP_NON_SHORT_CIRCUIT .  By defualt, it is defined as:
   (BRANCH_COST (optimize_function_for_speed_p (cfun), \
                 false) >= 2)
But MIPS defines it as 0.

Changing  LOGICAL_OP_NON_SHORT_CIRCUIT to 0 will disable this optimization.

LOGICAL_OP_NON_SHORT_CIRCUIT controls both places where (cond1 == 2048
|| cond2 == 8) would remove the branch.

NOTE I think MIPS defines LOGICAL_OP_NON_SHORT_CIRCUIT incorrectly but
that is a different story.

Thanks,
Andrew Pinski

I set BRANCH_COST to 1 for both predicted and non-predicted branches.
This generates the shorter sequence with a compare, but I'm concerned
that it will adversely affect code generation elsewhere.  Branches are
higher cost than simple instructions.

Looking at the code generated with BRANCH_COST > 1, it doesn't do what
I indicated above.  This did not reduce the number of branches.
In both cases there are two branches in this short test case.  When
BRANCH_COST > 1, there are three instructions to do a compare vs one
when BRANCH_COST = 1.  I'm at a loss to see where there is any benefit.

I'll take a look at the LOGICAL_OP_NON_SHORT_CIRCUIT settings and see
if this makes a difference.

--
Michael Eager    ea...@eagerm.com
1960 Park Blvd., Palo Alto, CA 94306

Reply via email to