Re: [AArch64, PATCH] Improve Neon store of zero

2017-09-13 Thread James Greenhalgh
On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 05:34:56PM +0100, Jackson Woodruff wrote: > Hi, > > I have addressed the issues you raised below. > > Is the amended patch OK for trunk? Yes, thanks. Committed as revision 252387. Cheers, James

Re: [AArch64, PATCH] Improve Neon store of zero

2017-09-13 Thread Jackson Woodruff
Hi, I have addressed the issues you raised below. Is the amended patch OK for trunk? Thanks, Jackson. On 09/12/2017 05:28 PM, James Greenhalgh wrote: On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 10:02:52AM +0100, Jackson Woodruff wrote: Hi all, I've attached a new patch that addresses some of the issues

Re: [AArch64, PATCH] Improve Neon store of zero

2017-09-12 Thread James Greenhalgh
On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 10:02:52AM +0100, Jackson Woodruff wrote: > Hi all, > > I've attached a new patch that addresses some of the issues raised with > my original patch. > > On 08/23/2017 03:35 PM, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: > > Richard Sandiford wrote: > >> > >> Sorry for only noticing now, but

Re: [AArch64, PATCH] Improve Neon store of zero

2017-09-06 Thread Jackson Woodruff
Hi all, I've attached a new patch that addresses some of the issues raised with my original patch. On 08/23/2017 03:35 PM, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: Richard Sandiford wrote: Sorry for only noticing now, but the call to aarch64_legitimate_address_p is asking whether the MEM itself is a

Re: [AArch64, PATCH] Improve Neon store of zero

2017-08-23 Thread Wilco Dijkstra
Richard Sandiford wrote: > > Sorry for only noticing now, but the call to aarch64_legitimate_address_p > is asking whether the MEM itself is a legitimate LDP/STP address. Also, > it might be better to pass false for strict_p, since this can be called > before RA. So maybe: > >if (GET_CODE

Re: [AArch64, PATCH] Improve Neon store of zero

2017-08-23 Thread Richard Sandiford
Jackson Woodruff writes: > diff --git a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64-simd.md > b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64-simd.md > index > 74de9b8c89dd5e4e3d87504594c969de0e0128ce..ce1b981fc005edf48a401a456def2a37cf9d9022 > 100644 > --- a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64-simd.md >

Re: [AArch64, PATCH] Improve Neon store of zero

2017-08-17 Thread Richard Earnshaw (lists)
On 16/08/17 16:19, Jackson Woodruff wrote: > Hi Richard, > > I have changed the condition as you suggest below. OK for trunk? > > Jackson. > I renamed the testcase to vect_str_zero.c, as that seems to more closely match the naming style, and checked this in. Thanks for the patch. R. > On

Re: [AArch64, PATCH] Improve Neon store of zero

2017-08-16 Thread Jackson Woodruff
Hi Richard, I have changed the condition as you suggest below. OK for trunk? Jackson. On 08/11/2017 02:56 PM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: On 10/08/17 14:12, Jackson Woodruff wrote: Hi all, This patch changes patterns in aarch64-simd.md to replace moviv0.4s, 0 strq0,

Re: [AArch64, PATCH] Improve Neon store of zero

2017-08-11 Thread Richard Earnshaw (lists)
On 10/08/17 14:12, Jackson Woodruff wrote: > Hi all, > > This patch changes patterns in aarch64-simd.md to replace > > moviv0.4s, 0 > strq0, [x0, 16] > > With: > > stp xzr, xzr, [x0, 16] > > When we are storing zeros to vectors like this: > > void f(uint32x4_t *p) { >

[AArch64, PATCH] Improve Neon store of zero

2017-08-10 Thread Jackson Woodruff
Hi all, This patch changes patterns in aarch64-simd.md to replace moviv0.4s, 0 strq0, [x0, 16] With: stp xzr, xzr, [x0, 16] When we are storing zeros to vectors like this: void f(uint32x4_t *p) { uint32x4_t x = { 0, 0, 0, 0}; p[1] = x; } Bootstrapped