> From: Marcus Shawcroft [mailto:marcus.shawcr...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2015 5:17 PM
> >
> > *** gcc/ChangeLog ***
> >
> > 2015-01-26 Thomas Preud'homme thomas.preudho...@arm.com
> >
> > * config.gcc: Add cortex-a57-fma-steering.o to extra_objs for
> > aarch64-*-*.
> >
> From: Marcus Shawcroft [mailto:marcus.shawcr...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2015 5:17 PM
>
> OK but wait for stage-1 to open for general development before you
> commit it please.
> /Marcus
Duly noted.
Best regards,
Thomas
On 28 January 2015 at 10:01, Thomas Preud'homme
wrote:
>> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
>> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Preud'homme
>>
>> Hi Andrew,
>>
>> cortex-a57-fma-steering.c is really meant to be autosufficient with
>> aarch64_register_fma_steering being
> From: pins...@gmail.com [mailto:pins...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 6:18 PM
> > +
> > + int get_id ();
> > + std::list *get_roots ();
>
> Why use std::list rather than vec?
When I experimented I realized that better code was generated
if the forests were ordered as they wer
On Jan 28, 2015, at 2:01 AM, Thomas Preud'homme
wrote:
>> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
>> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Preud'homme
>>
>> Hi Andrew,
>>
>> cortex-a57-fma-steering.c is really meant to be autosufficient with
>> aarch64_register_fma_steeri
> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Preud'homme
>
> Hi Andrew,
>
> cortex-a57-fma-steering.c is really meant to be autosufficient with
> aarch64_register_fma_steering being the only interface which is why I
> thought it was not worth
> From: Andrew Pinski [mailto:pins...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 6:03 PM
> >
> > +/* Defined in config/aarch64/fma_steering.c. */
> > +
> > +void
> > +aarch64_register_fma_steering (void);
>
>
> This is really bad form. Can you add a header file for this
> declaration and mayb
On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 5:42 AM, Thomas Preud'homme
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Quoting the patch:
>
> For better performance, the destination of FMADD/FMSUB instructions should
> have the same parity as their accumulator register if the accumulator contains
> the result of a previous FMUL or FMADD/FMSUB
> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Preud'homme
>
> ChangeLog entry is as follow:
>
> gcc/ChangeLog
>
> 2015-01-14 Thomas Preud'homme thomas.preudho...@arm.com
>
> * config.gcc: Add fma_steering.o to extra_objs for aarch64-*-*.
