Any further comments? Note GCC doesn't support S/UMULLS either since it is
equally
useless. It's no surprise that Thumb-2 removed support for flag-setting 64-bit
multiplies,
while AArch64 didn't add flag-setting multiplies. So there is no argument that
these
instructions are in any way useful to
Any further comments? Note GCC doesn't support S/UMULLS either since it is
equally
useless. It's no surprise that Thumb-2 removed support for flag-setting 64-bit
multiplies,
while AArch64 didn't add flag-setting multiplies. So there is no argument that
these
instructions are in any way useful to
Hi Richard, Kyrill,
>> I disagree. If they still trigger and generate better code than without
>> we should keep them.
>
>> What kind of code is *common* varies greatly from user to user.
Not really - doing a multiply and checking whether the result is zero is
exceedingly rare. I found only 3 c
On 18/09/2019 17:31, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Hi Wilco,
On 9/9/19 6:07 PM, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
ping
Remove various MULS/MLAS patterns which are enabled when optimizing for
size. However the codesize gain from these patterns is so minimal that
there is no point in keeping them.
I disagree.
Hi Wilco,
On 9/9/19 6:07 PM, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
ping
Remove various MULS/MLAS patterns which are enabled when optimizing for
size. However the codesize gain from these patterns is so minimal that
there is no point in keeping them.
I disagree. If they still trigger and generate better co
ping
Remove various MULS/MLAS patterns which are enabled when optimizing for
size. However the codesize gain from these patterns is so minimal that
there is no point in keeping them.
Bootstrap OK on armhf, regress passes.
ChangeLog:
2019-09-03 Wilco Dijkstra
* config/a
Remove various MULS/MLAS patterns which are enabled when optimizing for
size. However the codesize gain from these patterns is so minimal that
there is no point in keeping them.
Bootstrap OK on armhf, regress passes.
ChangeLog:
2019-09-03 Wilco Dijkstra
* config/arm/arm.md (mulsi3_co
