From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id 44DF43858D33; Mon,  6 Nov 2023 21:38:16 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 44DF43858D33
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1699306696;
	bh=6LA0g0eGVIXzM7hsb/XI4lsk84nwmNrHSY+ByvB9jAU=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=k7Zy6USsTWhp9UwydOI4W5rpPcxX2cOg4Qk/d7IWbgL1Av/YeH/uMGhH8sWG99fnb
	 zNBJ6+bdk4NdC9WAl7zMIECrGHe6XGQyw5/Ku/akG4eZE2yMozIG1/OHZFt/V3vhAk
	 uCytMLzrhXY+nJioXZ5QhgdPTpUqvyfbJxxoTK4o=
From: "amacleod at redhat dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/106511] [13/14 Regression] New
 -Werror=maybe-uninitialized since r13-1268-g8c99e307b20c502e
Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2023 21:38:15 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic, missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: amacleod at redhat dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 13.3
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-106511-4-cJL7ypwYqb@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-106511-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-106511-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D106511

--- Comment #7 from Andrew Macleod <amacleod at redhat dot com> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> VRP could use max_stmt_executions here (note it doesn't properly handle l=
oop
> nests so the name is somewhat misleading)

Given some arbitrary statement S, how do I find the relevant loop pointer to
pass to max_stmt_executions?    I don't suppose there is a generic version
which will take care of that lookup?

This seems like something the phi analyzer could easily use to calculate the
number of times the modifier statement triggers when we have loop PHIs and =
some
other PHI in parallel.. if I can easily ask how many times stmt S is
executed...=