From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-124284-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 18989 invoked by alias); 28 Dec 2004 23:32:03 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 18946 invoked by uid 48); 28 Dec 2004 23:31:58 -0000
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 23:32:00 -0000
Message-ID: <20041228233158.18945.qmail@sourceware.org>
From: "law at redhat dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
In-Reply-To: <20041216155140.19038.dje@gcc.gnu.org>
References: <20041216155140.19038.dje@gcc.gnu.org>
Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/19038] [4.0 Regression] out-of ssa causing loops to have more than one BB
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-SW-Source: 2004-12/txt/msg03817.txt.bz2
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>


------- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com  2004-12-28 23:31 -------
Yea, the code I've got lying around here to undo unprofitable const/copy
propagations definitely helps this code.   And better yet, we don't need
the full-blown version (which is queued for 4.1).  We can get by with the
very simplistic version.   For the testcase in comment #8 we generate the
following .optimized dump:

  # BLOCK 0
  # PRED: ENTRY [100.0%]  (fallthru,exec)
<L4>:;
  # SUCC: 1 [100.0%]  (fallthru,exec)

  # BLOCK 1
  # PRED: 0 [100.0%]  (fallthru,exec) 1 [89.0%]  (dfs_back,false,exec)
<L0>:;
  temp1 = temp2 * xlvj_ - temp3 * zlvj_;
  temp3 = temp2 * zlvj_ + temp3 * xlvj_;
  temp2 = temp1;
  if (temp3 != 0) goto <L2>; else goto <L0>;
  # SUCC: 2 [11.0%]  (loop_exit,true,exec) 1 [89.0%]  (dfs_back,false,exec)

  # BLOCK 2
  # PRED: 1 [11.0%]  (loop_exit,true,exec)
<L2>:;
  return yv1j_ * yv2j_;
  # SUCC: EXIT [100.0%]

}


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19038