2012/9/30 Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 8:35 AM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 8:06 AM, Vladimir Yakovlev vbyakov...@gmail.com
wrote:
The compiler with the patch and without post_reload.patch is built and works
successfully. It has the
On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Vladimir Yakovlev vbyakov...@gmail.com wrote:
The compiler with the patch and without post_reload.patch is built and
works
successfully. It has the only failure with avx-vzeroupper-3 test because of
post reload problem.
Ok, can you please elaborate a bit on
Will we wait for LRA commit or is it possiple to commit to trank
vzeroupper patch now?
2012/10/2 Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com:
On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Vladimir Yakovlev vbyakov...@gmail.com
wrote:
The compiler with the patch and without post_reload.patch is built and
works
On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 12:08 PM, Vladimir Yakovlev vbyakov...@gmail.com wrote:
Will we wait for LRA commit or is it possiple to commit to trank
vzeroupper patch now?
Since we can emit vzeroupper now, we will wait for LRA.
Uros.
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 8:35 AM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 8:06 AM, Vladimir Yakovlev vbyakov...@gmail.com
wrote:
The compiler with the patch and without post_reload.patch is built and works
successfully. It has the only failure with avx-vzeroupper-3 test
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 8:06 AM, Vladimir Yakovlev vbyakov...@gmail.com wrote:
The compiler with the patch and without post_reload.patch is built and works
successfully. It has the only failure with avx-vzeroupper-3 test because of
post reload problem.
Ok, can you please elaborate a bit on
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 10:57 PM, Vladimir Yakovlev
vbyakov...@gmail.com wrote:
Attached files
i386.patch contains changes for vzeroupper placement.
post_reload.patch contens changes for post reload pass.
I have bootstrap problem with post_reload.patch.
Does the patch without
Hi Ricard,
You are right I no need the changes in mode-switchig.c at all. After I
remove additional argument from EMIT_MODE_SET and run 'make check' I
found no differences with make check result of previous run. So I no
need in any changes in the middle end part.
Regards,
Vladimir
P.S. I'll
Hello!
You are right I no need the changes in mode-switchig.c at all. After I
remove additional argument from EMIT_MODE_SET and run 'make check' I
found no differences with make check result of previous run. So I no
need in any changes in the middle end part.
Vladimir, can you please
I tried to perform vzeroupper emitting after reload as additional pass
of mode switching.
I sow one problem that I don't know haw to overcome. After
'pro_and_epilogue', there can be no
flow edge to exit block and pre_exit block is not created in this case
(see rotine create_pre_exit).
Without that
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Vladimir Yakovlev vbyakov...@gmail.com wrote:
I tried to perform vzeroupper emitting after reload as additional pass
of mode switching.
I sow one problem that I don't know haw to overcome. After
'pro_and_epilogue', there can be no
flow edge to exit block and
Looks OK to me, though I have no authority to approve it
except SH specific part.
Is there any more comments? Can it be committed in trank?
Regards,
Vladimir
2012/9/14 Kaz Kojima kkoj...@rr.iij4u.or.jp:
Vladimir Yakovlev vbyakov...@gmail.com wrote:
I reproduced the failure and found reason
Vladimir Yakovlev vbyakov...@gmail.com writes:
I reproduced the failure and found reason of it. I understood haw it
resolve and now I need small changes only - additional argument of
EMIT_MODE_SET. Is it good fo trunk?
I'm not sure I understand why you need to know the instruction.
The x86
Hello,
I reproduced the failure and found reason of it. I understood haw it
resolve and now I need small changes only - additional argument of
EMIT_MODE_SET. Is it good fo trunk?
Thank you,
Vladimir
2012-09-14 Vladimir Yakovlev vladimir.b.yakov...@intel.com
*
Additionaly.
You can find the patch history in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-08/msg01590.html.
I need this changes for my implementation of vzeroupper placement:
for some statements I have no needs doing real insertion.
I tested the changes on bootstrap using config
Vladimir Yakovlev vbyakov...@gmail.com wrote:
I reproduced the failure and found reason of it. I understood haw it
resolve and now I need small changes only - additional argument of
EMIT_MODE_SET. Is it good fo trunk?
Thank you,
Vladimir
2012-09-14 Vladimir Yakovlev
I've tried the patch on sh4-unknown-linux-gnu. I see new failures
with it:
Here is a reduced test case for sh4-unknown-linux-gnu.
volatile double gd[32];
volatile float gf[32];
int main ()
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i 32; i++)
gd[i] = i * 4, gf[i] = i;
for (i = 0; i 32; i++)
if
Thank you for testing.
With commenting out if (i != mode) of the hunk
I changed type of transp and added this checking because if we reset
transp[mode], then later in the loop
FOR_EACH_BB (bb)
sbitmap_not (kill[bb-index], transp[i][bb-index]);
we set kill of the bb for that mode
I discoverd some inaccuracies when tried to implement vzeroupper
insertion (pr#47440).
First, I made 'transp' as an array of bit vectors rather bitvector
because it should be own for each mode, otherwise its resetting on
mode changing kills all modes (and new mode also).
Another changes concern
Vladimir Yakovlev vbyakov...@gmail.com wrote:
I discoverd some inaccuracies when tried to implement vzeroupper
insertion (pr#47440).
First, I made 'transp' as an array of bit vectors rather bitvector
because it should be own for each mode, otherwise its resetting on
mode changing kills all
20 matches
Mail list logo
