aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorRichard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@linaro.org>2017-11-09 14:51:57 +0000
committerRichard Sandiford <rsandifo@gcc.gnu.org>2017-11-09 14:51:57 +0000
commit4d93060263ecf25f6324dbc5d07bbd79166cb2a3 (patch)
tree292c271ccc5d5f5031741141dc65eab9a1766ff5 /gcc/tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c
parent1eae67f812a0b7b6b7132d0375e662bc6200d68a (diff)
downloadgcc-4d93060263ecf25f6324dbc5d07bbd79166cb2a3.zip
gcc-4d93060263ecf25f6324dbc5d07bbd79166cb2a3.tar.gz
gcc-4d93060263ecf25f6324dbc5d07bbd79166cb2a3.tar.bz2
Improve ivopts handling of forced scales
This patch improves the ivopts address cost calculation for modes in which an index must be scaled rather than unscaled. Previously we would only try the scaled form if the unscaled form was valid. Many of the SVE tests rely on this when matching scaled indices. 2017-11-09 Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@linaro.org> Alan Hayward <alan.hayward@arm.com> David Sherwood <david.sherwood@arm.com> gcc/ * tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c (get_address_cost): Try using a scaled index even if the unscaled address was invalid. Don't increase the complexity of using a scale in that case. Co-Authored-By: Alan Hayward <alan.hayward@arm.com> Co-Authored-By: David Sherwood <david.sherwood@arm.com> From-SVN: r254585
Diffstat (limited to 'gcc/tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c')
-rw-r--r--gcc/tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c17
1 files changed, 13 insertions, 4 deletions
diff --git a/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c b/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c
index e16a482..65794b2 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c
+++ b/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c
@@ -4331,18 +4331,25 @@ get_address_cost (struct ivopts_data *data, struct iv_use *use,
machine_mode addr_mode = TYPE_MODE (type);
machine_mode mem_mode = TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (*use->op_p));
addr_space_t as = TYPE_ADDR_SPACE (TREE_TYPE (use->iv->base));
+ /* Only true if ratio != 1. */
+ bool ok_with_ratio_p = false;
+ bool ok_without_ratio_p = false;
if (!aff_combination_const_p (aff_inv))
{
parts.index = integer_one_node;
/* Addressing mode "base + index". */
- if (valid_mem_ref_p (mem_mode, as, &parts))
+ ok_without_ratio_p = valid_mem_ref_p (mem_mode, as, &parts);
+ if (ratio != 1)
{
parts.step = wide_int_to_tree (type, ratio);
/* Addressing mode "base + index << scale". */
- if (ratio != 1 && !valid_mem_ref_p (mem_mode, as, &parts))
+ ok_with_ratio_p = valid_mem_ref_p (mem_mode, as, &parts);
+ if (!ok_with_ratio_p)
parts.step = NULL_TREE;
-
+ }
+ if (ok_with_ratio_p || ok_without_ratio_p)
+ {
if (aff_inv->offset != 0)
{
parts.offset = wide_int_to_tree (sizetype, aff_inv->offset);
@@ -4440,7 +4447,9 @@ get_address_cost (struct ivopts_data *data, struct iv_use *use,
if (parts.symbol != NULL_TREE)
cost.complexity += 1;
- if (parts.step != NULL_TREE && !integer_onep (parts.step))
+ /* Don't increase the complexity of adding a scaled index if it's
+ the only kind of index that the target allows. */
+ if (parts.step != NULL_TREE && ok_without_ratio_p)
cost.complexity += 1;
if (parts.base != NULL_TREE && parts.index != NULL_TREE)
cost.complexity += 1;