* [Bug tree-optimization/111294] [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d
2023-09-05 15:05 [Bug tree-optimization/111294] New: [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d theodort at inf dot ethz.ch
@ 2023-09-05 15:43 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-09-05 15:47 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (12 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-09-05 15:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111294
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |missed-optimization
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/111294] [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d
2023-09-05 15:05 [Bug tree-optimization/111294] New: [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d theodort at inf dot ethz.ch
2023-09-05 15:43 ` [Bug tree-optimization/111294] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-09-05 15:47 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-09-05 16:03 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (11 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-09-05 15:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111294
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
In .optimized we have:
<bb 4> [local count: 118111600]:
# _31 = PHI <5(2), 0(3)>
_6 = (int) a.9_28;
_8 = _31 <= 3;
_9 = (int) _8;
if (_6 != _9)
goto <bb 5>; [66.00%]
else
goto <bb 6>; [34.00%]
Except nothing optimizes _8 into the phi post pre (note _31 is only used in the
definition of _8 even).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/111294] [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d
2023-09-05 15:05 [Bug tree-optimization/111294] New: [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d theodort at inf dot ethz.ch
2023-09-05 15:43 ` [Bug tree-optimization/111294] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-09-05 15:47 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-09-05 16:03 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-09-05 16:32 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (10 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-09-05 16:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111294
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The difference is jump threading:
old (able to remove foo):
```
Registering killing_def (path_oracle) _4
Registering value_relation (path_oracle) (_4 pe8 _33) (root: bb5)
Checking profitability of path (backwards):
[1] Registering jump thread: (5, 7) incoming edge; (7, 9) nocopy;
path: 5->7->9 SUCCESS
```
vs
new (not able to remove foo):
```
Registering killing_def (path_oracle) _33
Registering value_relation (path_oracle) (_33 pe8 _31) (root: bb5)
Checking profitability of path (backwards): FAIL: Jump-thread path not
considered: duplication of 2 insns is needed and optimizing for size.
path: 5->7->xx REJECTED
```
Old IR before jump threading:
```
<bb 5> [local count: 118111600]:
a.9_28 = a;
if (a.9_28 != 0)
goto <bb 6>; [34.00%]
else
goto <bb 7>; [66.00%]
<bb 6> [local count: 40157944]:
_30 = (char) b.1_2;
<bb 7> [local count: 118111600]:
# _33 = PHI <_30(6), 0(5)>
_4 = (unsigned char) _33;
_6 = (int) a.9_28;
j_22 = (short int) _4;
_20 = (int) _4;
if (_4 > 11)
goto <bb 8>; [50.00%]
else
goto <bb 9>; [50.00%]
```
New:
```
<bb 5> [local count: 118111600]:
a.9_28 = a;
if (a.9_28 != 0)
goto <bb 6>; [34.00%]
else
goto <bb 7>; [66.00%]
<bb 6> [local count: 40157944]:
<bb 7> [local count: 118111600]:
# _31 = PHI <b.1_2(6), 0(5)>
_32 = (char) _31;
_4 = (unsigned char) _31;
_6 = (int) a.9_28;
j_22 = (short int) _4;
_33 = _31 & 255;
if (_33 > 11)
goto <bb 8>; [50.00%]
else
goto <bb 9>; [50.00%]
```
But _32 will be 0, _4 will be 0, j_22 will be 0, _33 will be 0.
But I think jump threading does not recognize j_22 will be 0 on that edge and
considers it a copy ... I think.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/111294] [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d
2023-09-05 15:05 [Bug tree-optimization/111294] New: [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d theodort at inf dot ethz.ch
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-05 16:03 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-09-05 16:32 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-09-05 21:02 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-09-05 16:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111294
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last reconfirmed| |2023-09-05
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Confirmed.(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
>
> But _32 will be 0, _4 will be 0, j_22 will be 0, _33 will be 0.
> But I think jump threading does not recognize j_22 will be 0 on that edge
> and considers it a copy ... I think.
after:
Checking profitability of path (backwards): bb:7 (4 insns) bb:5
Control statement insns: 2
Overall: 2 insns
before:
Checking profitability of path (backwards): bb:7 (3 insns) bb:5
Control statement insns: 2
Overall: 1 insns
Actually I think it is counting an already dead statement. The statement:
_32 = (charD.10) _31;
is dead but is being counted.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/111294] [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d
2023-09-05 15:05 [Bug tree-optimization/111294] New: [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d theodort at inf dot ethz.ch
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-05 16:32 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-09-05 21:02 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-09-12 11:08 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-09-05 21:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111294
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> In .optimized we have:
> <bb 4> [local count: 118111600]:
> # _31 = PHI <5(2), 0(3)>
> _6 = (int) a.9_28;
> _8 = _31 <= 3;
> _9 = (int) _8;
> if (_6 != _9)
> goto <bb 5>; [66.00%]
> else
> goto <bb 6>; [34.00%]
>
> Except nothing optimizes _8 into the phi post pre (note _31 is only used in
> the definition of _8 even).
But optimizing that does not help here.
Someone who understands jump threading should look into this.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/111294] [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d
2023-09-05 15:05 [Bug tree-optimization/111294] New: [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d theodort at inf dot ethz.ch
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-05 21:02 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-09-12 11:08 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-09-13 13:35 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-09-12 11:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111294
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I will have a look (the const code is old & odd)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/111294] [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d
2023-09-05 15:05 [Bug tree-optimization/111294] New: [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d theodort at inf dot ethz.ch
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-12 11:08 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-09-13 13:35 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-09-13 15:51 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-09-13 13:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111294
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
So the issue is that forwprop & folding has a hard time in cleaning up dead
code afterwards but it would also benefit from doing that more aggressively
(and early) because of single_use () and friends.
I'm thinking of hooking into update_stmt to discover candidates for
simple-dce-from-worklist (likely not early and aggressive enough though).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/111294] [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d
2023-09-05 15:05 [Bug tree-optimization/111294] New: [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d theodort at inf dot ethz.ch
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-13 13:35 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-09-13 15:51 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-09-14 7:12 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-09-13 15:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111294
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 55892
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55892&action=edit
version of using simple_dce_from_worklist in forwprop
This is a version of using simple_dce_from_worklist in forwprop I had tried at
one point, but I don't remember why I did finish up this patch.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/111294] [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d
2023-09-05 15:05 [Bug tree-optimization/111294] New: [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d theodort at inf dot ethz.ch
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-13 15:51 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-09-14 7:12 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-09-14 7:12 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-09-14 7:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111294
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> Created attachment 55892 [details]
> version of using simple_dce_from_worklist in forwprop
>
> This is a version of using simple_dce_from_worklist in forwprop I had tried
> at one point, but I don't remember why I did finish up this patch.
That wouldn't catch the case in question. The issue is when we simplify
_32 = (char) _31;
- _4 = (unsigned char) _32;
+ _4 = (unsigned char) _31;
we don't realize _32 becomes unused. I think it might be enough to add
all original SSA uses of a stmt we fold to the DCE worklist if we simplified
it (and also before substituting from the fwprop lattice?). I think it
doesn't work to look at orig_stmt operands before we do update_stmt on the
new stmt.
Sth like the attached works though.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/111294] [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d
2023-09-05 15:05 [Bug tree-optimization/111294] New: [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d theodort at inf dot ethz.ch
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-14 7:12 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-09-14 7:12 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-09-14 7:32 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-09-14 7:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111294
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 55898
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55898&action=edit
alternative patch for simple_dce_from_worklist
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/111294] [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d
2023-09-05 15:05 [Bug tree-optimization/111294] New: [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d theodort at inf dot ethz.ch
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-14 7:12 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-09-14 7:32 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-09-14 11:17 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-09-14 7:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111294
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
But this stmt isn't the issue, BB7 is
<bb 7> [local count: 118111600]:
# _31 = PHI <b.1_2(6), 0(5)>
_4 = (unsigned char) _31;
_6 = (int) a.8_28;
j_22 = (short int) _4;
_33 = _31 & 255;
if (_33 > 11)
and that does have one more stmt. It's
if (a.8_28 != 0)
goto <bb 6>; [34.00%]
else
goto <bb 7>; [66.00%]
<bb 6> [local count: 40157944]:
<bb 7> [local count: 118111600]:
# _31 = PHI <b.1_2(6), 0(5)>
_4 = (unsigned char) _31;
_6 = (int) a.8_28;
j_22 = (short int) _4;
_33 = _31 & 255;
if (_33 > 11)
goto <bb 8>; [50.00%]
else
goto <bb 9>; [50.00%]
<bb 8> [local count: 59055800]:
<bb 9> [local count: 118111600]:
# iftmp.11_27 = PHI <j_22(7), 1(8)>
so what the cost model fails to see is that j_22 and _4 are only live
on one path to BB9.
It's that odd code again I attempted to remove at some point:
/* PHIs in the path will create degenerate PHIS in the
copied path which will then get propagated away, so
looking at just the duplicate path the PHIs would
seem unimportant.
But those PHIs, because they're assignments to objects
typically with lives that exist outside the thread path,
will tend to generate PHIs (or at least new PHI arguments)
at points where we leave the thread path and rejoin
the original blocks. So we do want to account for them.
We ignore virtual PHIs. We also ignore cases where BB
has a single incoming edge. That's the most common
degenerate PHI we'll see here. Finally we ignore PHIs
that are associated with the value we're tracking as
that object likely dies. */
if (EDGE_COUNT (bb->succs) > 1 && EDGE_COUNT (bb->preds) > 1)
{
for (gphi_iterator gsip = gsi_start_phis (bb);
!gsi_end_p (gsip);
gsi_next (&gsip))
{
gphi *phi = gsip.phi ();
tree dst = gimple_phi_result (phi);
/* Note that if both NAME and DST are anonymous
SSA_NAMEs, then we do not have enough information
to consider them associated. */
if (dst != name
&& name
&& TREE_CODE (name) == SSA_NAME
&& (SSA_NAME_VAR (dst) != SSA_NAME_VAR (name)
|| !SSA_NAME_VAR (dst))
&& !virtual_operand_p (dst))
++m_n_insns;
}
}
there's also a missed canonicalization I think:
_4 = (unsigned char) _31;
_6 = (int) a.8_28;
j_22 = (short int) _4;
_33 = _31 & 255;
we canonicalize (int)(unsigned char) _31 to _31 & 255 but we fail to
do the same for (short)(unsigned char) _31 or rather we fail to
anticipate that (short)_33 could be used for j_22, eliding _4.
Maybe costing "lowparts" as zero would be useful here.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/111294] [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d
2023-09-05 15:05 [Bug tree-optimization/111294] New: [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d theodort at inf dot ethz.ch
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-14 7:32 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-09-14 11:17 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-09-18 8:56 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-09-18 8:57 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-09-14 11:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111294
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener <rguenth@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9ea74d235c7e7816b996a17c61288f02ef767985
commit r14-3982-g9ea74d235c7e7816b996a17c61288f02ef767985
Author: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
Date: Thu Sep 14 09:31:23 2023 +0200
tree-optimization/111294 - better DCE after forwprop
The following adds more aggressive DCE to forwprop to clean up dead
stmts when folding a stmt leaves some operands unused. The patch
uses simple_dce_from_worklist for this purpose, queueing original
operands before substitution and folding, but only if we folded the
stmt.
This removes one dead stmt biasing threading costs in a later pass
but it doesn't resolve the optimization issue in the PR yet.
PR tree-optimization/111294
* tree-ssa-forwprop.cc (pass_forwprop::execute): Track
operands that eventually become dead and use
simple_dce_from_worklist
to remove their definitions if they did so.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/evrp10.c: Adjust.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/evrp6.c: Likewise.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/forwprop-31.c: Likewise.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/neg-cast-3.c: Likewise.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/111294] [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d
2023-09-05 15:05 [Bug tree-optimization/111294] New: [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d theodort at inf dot ethz.ch
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-14 11:17 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-09-18 8:56 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-09-18 8:57 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-09-18 8:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111294
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener <rguenth@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d45ddc2c04e471d0dcee016b6edacc00b8341b16
commit r14-4089-gd45ddc2c04e471d0dcee016b6edacc00b8341b16
Author: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
Date: Thu Sep 14 13:06:51 2023 +0200
tree-optimization/111294 - backwards threader PHI costing
This revives an earlier patch since the problematic code applying
extra costs to PHIs in copied blocks we couldn't make any sense of
prevents a required threading in this case. Instead of coming up
with an artificial other costing the following simply removes the
bits.
As with all threading changes this requires a plethora of testsuite
adjustments, but only the last three are unfortunate as is the
libgomp team.c adjustment which is required to avoid a bogus -Werror
diagnostic during bootstrap.
PR tree-optimization/111294
gcc/
* tree-ssa-threadbackward.cc (back_threader_profitability::m_name):
Remove
(back_threader::find_paths_to_names): Adjust.
(back_threader::maybe_thread_block): Likewise.
(back_threader_profitability::possibly_profitable_path_p): Remove
code applying extra costs to copies PHIs.
libgomp/
* team.c (gomp_team_start): Assert alloca size to avoid false
positive alloc-size diagnostic.
gcc/testsuite/
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr111294.c: New test.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/phi_on_compare-4.c: Adjust.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr59597.c: Likewise.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr61839_2.c: Likewise.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-sink-18.c: Likewise.
* g++.dg/warn/Wstringop-overflow-4.C: XFAIL subtest on ilp32.
* gcc.dg/uninit-pred-9_b.c: XFAIL subtest everywhere.
* gcc.dg/vect/vect-117.c: Make scan for not Invalid sum
conditional on lp64.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/111294] [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d
2023-09-05 15:05 [Bug tree-optimization/111294] New: [14 Regression] Missed Dead Code Elimination since r14-573-g69f1a8af45d theodort at inf dot ethz.ch
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-18 8:56 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-09-18 8:57 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-09-18 8:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111294
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread