public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "law at redhat dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/19038] [4.0 Regression] out-of ssa causing loops to have more than one BB Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 18:39:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20041230183944.24848.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20041216155140.19038.dje@gcc.gnu.org> ------- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2004-12-30 18:39 ------- Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] out-of ssa causing loops to have more than one BB On Thu, 2004-12-30 at 17:27 +0000, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > ------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-30 17:27 ------- > (In reply to comment #31) > > Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] out-of ssa > > causing loops to have more than one BB > > > Now if you think that PR is a trivial case that should be caught, then, > > show me why and I'll take a closer look. > > The reason why it is not caught is because we don't cleanup the cfg while doing the > loop optimizations, this has been fixed already on the tcb. Can you be more precise how cleaning up the CFG during the loop optimizer affects the code that we see during out-of-ssa. Specifically how does it affect PHI arguments on backedges and the proper marking of backedges in the CFG? > > Oh, by the way I see that sixtrack has regressed on x86 now with your patch applied, I think this is > because we still have the same problem as before as ivopts puts the new instruction in an empty BB > which becomes from not cleaning up the cfg. Again, more information please on how this affects us during out-of-ssa? I'm happy to look into these problems, but you've apparently got a lot more state on them than I do. I'd like to learn what you already know to speed up that process. jeff -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19038
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-12-30 18:39 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2004-12-16 15:52 [Bug rtl-optimization/19038] New: Loop header copying dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-16 21:39 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/19038] " dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-16 22:55 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-17 4:04 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-17 4:05 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-17 4:16 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-17 4:28 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 18:25 ` [Bug tree-optimization/19038] [4.0 Regression] out-of ssa causing loops to have more than one BB pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 19:04 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 19:23 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-20 19:47 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-22 19:03 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-23 2:41 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-23 15:19 ` dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-23 16:00 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-24 12:13 ` mustafa at il dot ibm dot com 2004-12-24 12:42 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-24 12:46 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-24 12:52 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-24 12:55 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-26 1:09 ` dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-26 15:06 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-27 21:08 ` law at redhat dot com 2004-12-28 8:22 ` law at redhat dot com 2004-12-28 9:18 ` law at redhat dot com 2004-12-28 23:32 ` law at redhat dot com 2004-12-29 19:33 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-29 20:50 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-29 20:52 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-29 21:06 ` law at redhat dot com 2004-12-30 17:27 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-30 18:39 ` law at redhat dot com [this message] 2004-12-30 18:49 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-30 21:51 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-04 4:04 ` law at redhat dot com 2005-01-04 4:10 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-10 20:02 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-12 13:34 ` amacleod at redhat dot com 2005-01-18 0:50 ` [Bug tree-optimization/19038] [4.0 Regression] ivopts " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-18 5:02 ` law at redhat dot com 2005-01-19 22:50 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-19 23:25 ` [Bug tree-optimization/19038] [4.0 Regression] out of ssa " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-19 23:34 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 0:31 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 0:47 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 1:15 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21 13:18 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21 13:22 ` rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz 2005-01-21 13:27 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21 13:29 ` [Bug tree-optimization/19038] [4.0 Regression] tree-ssa " steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21 19:19 ` dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-22 1:51 ` dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-22 16:48 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-22 16:49 ` dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20041230183944.24848.qmail@sourceware.org \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).