public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "amacleod at redhat dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/110251] [13/14 Regression] Hang at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2023 13:30:44 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-110251-4-CUGSNYVDSh@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-110251-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110251 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Macleod <amacleod at redhat dot com> --- hmm. yeah. its triggering some kind of pathological edge evaluation between GORI and cache updating. There is a long sequence of dependent stmts, presumably the unrolled loop, and a sequential series of conditions.. ie: _4 = (short unsigned int) c.2_1; _5 = _4 + 65535; a_lsm.19_30 = a; _49 = _4 + 65534; _12 = _5 & _49; _46 = _12 + 65535; _48 = _12 & _46; _59 = _48 + 65535; _60 = _48 & _59; <...> if (_12 != 0) if (_48 != 0) if (_60 != 0) <...> note the interdependence of say _48 and _12. Evaluating _48 evaluates _12 and _46. _46 evaluates _12 as well, and then it continues.. Edge evaluation still has no caching, so its calculated as required. This is causing a cascading exponential growth of edge evaluations the further we go. Caching outgoing edge evaluations should resolve this, as would identifying the situation with 2 operands that have an interdependence and evaluating them together rather than independently, thus removing the exponential explosion. still considering... .
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-21 13:30 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2023-06-14 14:16 [Bug c/110251] New: " shaohua.li at inf dot ethz.ch 2023-06-15 3:42 ` [Bug tree-optimization/110251] [14 Regression] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-15 4:32 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-15 4:37 ` [Bug tree-optimization/110251] [13/14 " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-15 6:20 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-20 10:21 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-20 10:35 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-06-21 13:30 ` amacleod at redhat dot com [this message] 2023-06-26 14:04 ` amacleod at redhat dot com 2023-06-26 14:05 ` amacleod at redhat dot com 2023-07-27 9:26 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-16 14:54 ` iamanonymous.cs at gmail dot com 2024-01-16 14:58 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-16 15:05 ` amacleod at redhat dot com 2024-01-16 18:06 ` amacleod at redhat dot com 2024-01-16 18:11 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-16 18:27 ` amacleod at redhat dot com 2024-01-17 1:21 ` iamanonymous.cs at gmail dot com 2024-01-17 10:34 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-05-21 9:15 ` [Bug tree-optimization/110251] [13 " jakub at gcc dot gnu.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=bug-110251-4-CUGSNYVDSh@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --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).