| Message ID | 20200528085207.4021-2-guojiufu@linux.ibm.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [1/2] Introduce flag_cunroll_grow_size for cunroll | expand |
Hi Jiufu, On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 04:52:07PM +0800, guojiufu wrote: > gcc/ChangeLog > 2020-02-28 Jiufu Guo <guojiufu@linux.ibm.com> > > PR target/95018 > * config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_option_override_internal): > Override flag_cunroll_grow_size. This part is fine of course. Thanks! Segher
guojiufu <guojiufu@linux.ibm.com> writes: > From: Jiufu Guo <guojiufu@linux.ibm.com> > > --- a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c > +++ b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c > @@ -4567,7 +4567,12 @@ rs6000_option_override_internal (bool global_init_p) > unroll_only_small_loops = 0; > if (!global_options_set.x_flag_rename_registers) > flag_rename_registers = 1; > + if (!global_options_set.x_flag_cunroll_grow_size) > + flag_cunroll_grow_size = 1; > } > + else > + if (!global_options_set.x_flag_cunroll_grow_size) > + flag_cunroll_grow_size = flag_peel_loops; As this patch V2 1/2, also update here accordingy: flag_cunroll_grow_size = flag_peel_loops || optimize >= 3; > > /* If using typedef char *va_list, signal that > __builtin_va_start (&ap, 0) can be optimized to BR, Jiufu
diff --git a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c index 8435bc15d72..df6e03146cb 100644 --- a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c +++ b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c @@ -4567,7 +4567,12 @@ rs6000_option_override_internal (bool global_init_p) unroll_only_small_loops = 0; if (!global_options_set.x_flag_rename_registers) flag_rename_registers = 1; + if (!global_options_set.x_flag_cunroll_grow_size) + flag_cunroll_grow_size = 1; } + else + if (!global_options_set.x_flag_cunroll_grow_size) + flag_cunroll_grow_size = flag_peel_loops; /* If using typedef char *va_list, signal that __builtin_va_start (&ap, 0) can be optimized to
From: Jiufu Guo <guojiufu@linux.ibm.com> Previously, flag_unroll_loops was turned on at -O2 implicitly. It also turned on cunroll with allowance size increasing, and then cunroll will unroll/peel the loop even the loop is complex like code in PR95018. With this patch, size growth for cunroll is allowed if -funroll-loops or -fpeel-loops is specified explicitly. Bootstrap/regtest pass on powerpc64le. OK for trunk? And backport to GCC10? BR, Jiufu gcc/ChangeLog 2020-02-28 Jiufu Guo <guojiufu@linux.ibm.com> PR target/95018 * config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_option_override_internal): Override flag_cunroll_grow_size. --- gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)