RFR(S): 8075324: Costs of memory operands in aarch64.ad are inconsistent
tobias.hartmann at oracle.com
Wed Mar 18 11:25:24 UTC 2015
On 18.03.2015 12:22, Andrew Dinn wrote:
> On 18/03/15 10:46, Tobias Hartmann wrote:
>> thanks a lot for the detailed explanation! That makes sense to me.
>> I was confused by the fact that the generation of the additional add in the case of a scaled-indirect-with-offset, is done 'implicitly' in loadStore and therefore we have to account for that by setting a higher cost for the corresponding memory operand.
>> Do you think we should still fix the cost of 'indOffI'? If so, here is the corresponding webrev:
> Yes, that's the correct fix for the existing rules. I'll respond
> regarding your new proposed rules in the other thread.
> Andrew Dinn
> Senior Principal Software Engineer
> Red Hat UK Ltd
> Registered in UK and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903
> Directors: Michael Cunningham (USA), Matt Parson (USA), Charlie Peters
> (USA), Michael O'Neill (Ireland)
More information about the hotspot-compiler-dev