From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32494 invoked by alias); 4 Sep 2010 13:52:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 32408 invoked by uid 48); 4 Sep 2010 13:51:58 -0000 Date: Sat, 04 Sep 2010 13:52:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20100904135158.32407.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/45522] VRP misses oppurtunity for statement folding. In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-09/txt/msg00564.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #9 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-04 13:51 ------- Hi, thanks. In meantime I made tree-ssa-pre to fold statements it produces and it gets me to bootstrapland with sanity check in expr.c except for Ada (with the patches I sent so far) So it seems that I need to basically duplicate all logic for initializer folding from tree-ssa-ccp.c into this function, right? I guess it makes sense, but it is all quite ugly. On VN side, i wondered if we can retire more of expand this way. For example dojump knows that: a = b ror x; if (a != 0) can be folded into: if (b != 0) (ror is rotation). I guess we should do this kind of tricks in VN instead? Honza -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45522