I have the following simple program:
#define N 20
long c[N];
long a[N + N];
void f(void)
{
long *s = c;
long *p = a;
while (p != a + N) *p++ = *s++;
while (p != a + N + N) *p++ = 0;
}
I compile it with:
/usr/gcc-arm-none-eabi-5_4-2016q3/bin/arm-none-eabi-gcc -mthumb -O3 -o main.o -c main.c
gcc conveniently replaces the loops with memcpy
and memset
respectively:
00000000 <f>:
0: b570 push {r4, r5, r6, lr}
2: 4d07 ldr r5, [pc, #28] ; (20 <f+0x20>)
4: 4c07 ldr r4, [pc, #28] ; (24 <f+0x24>)
6: 002a movs r2, r5
8: 4907 ldr r1, [pc, #28] ; (28 <f+0x28>)
a: 0020 movs r0, r4
c: f7ff fffe bl 0 <memcpy>
10: 1960 adds r0, r4, r5
12: 002a movs r2, r5
14: 2100 movs r1, #0
16: f7ff fffe bl 0 <memset>
1a: bc70 pop {r4, r5, r6}
1c: bc01 pop {r0}
1e: 4700 bx r0
Obviously, gcc is smart and decides that library implementation is more efficient, which may or may not be the case in each particular situation. I am wondering how this behavior can be avoided when, for example, speed is not important and library calls are not desirable.
Okay, searching through https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Optimize-Options.html reveals the following option:
-ftree-loop-distribute-patterns
Perform loop distribution of patterns that can be code generated with calls to a library. This flag is enabled by default at -O3.
Specifying -fno-tree-loop-distribute-patterns
avoids touching the standard library without seemingly affecting other optimizations.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With