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: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 04:04:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050104040438.28655.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20041216155140.19038.dje@gcc.gnu.org>


------- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com  2005-01-04 04:04 -------
Subject: Re:  [4.0 Regression] out-of ssa
	causing loops to have more than one BB

On Thu, 2004-12-30 at 21:51 +0000, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> ------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2004-12-30 21:50 -------
> (In reply to comment #34)
> Actually it is because we are placing statements in the loop's latch.
> It is done in create_new_iv.
So just to be clear, it's not my change that is causing a regression.
The IV code creates situations which prevent my change from having
any kind of impact because the loop backedge is already split by
the IV code (and thus the loop backedge is no longer critical and
my out-of-ssa code does nothing).

Right?

Jeff

ps.  It seems to me that the IV code could use a trick similar to what I
did to the out-of-ssa code.  The only significant complication would be
that the IV code would have to verify that the code it wants to insert
is safe on both path (loop backedge and loop exit).





-- 


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


  parent reply	other threads:[~2005-01-04  4:04 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
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 [this message]
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=20050104040438.28655.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: link
Be 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).