public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug tree-optimization/37239] peeling last iteration of a <= loop
[not found] <bug-37239-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
@ 2015-07-02 16:18 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-12-11 22:24 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-07-02 16:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37239
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blocks| |26163
Known to fail| |
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
There is another case where this optimization can come into handy and shows up
in SPEC 2006.:
for (i = 1; i <= N; i++)
{
...
if (i < N)
{
...
}
}
This is inside hammer's inner most loop.
Referenced Bugs:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
[Bug 26163] [meta-bug] missed optimization in SPEC (2k and 2k6 and 95)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/37239] peeling last iteration of a <= loop
[not found] <bug-37239-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2015-07-02 16:18 ` [Bug tree-optimization/37239] peeling last iteration of a <= loop pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-12-11 22:24 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-12-11 22:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37239
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
lsplit reports:
Found potential split point: if (maxIdx_171 <= qty_7)
{ i_6 * 2 + I*-2 } le_expr qty_7
But nothing else ...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/37239] peeling last iteration of a <= loop
2008-08-26 11:35 [Bug tree-optimization/37239] New: " bonzini at gnu dot org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2008-08-27 12:09 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
@ 2008-08-29 4:28 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-08-29 4:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
| |org
Severity|normal |enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37239
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/37239] peeling last iteration of a <= loop
2008-08-26 11:35 [Bug tree-optimization/37239] New: " bonzini at gnu dot org
2008-08-26 11:37 ` [Bug tree-optimization/37239] " bonzini at gnu dot org
2008-08-27 11:59 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2008-08-27 12:09 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2008-08-29 4:28 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: bonzini at gnu dot org @ 2008-08-27 12:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #3 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-08-27 12:08 -------
no, it does not and I think it should not except for this particular case (or
other similar ones).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37239
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/37239] peeling last iteration of a <= loop
2008-08-26 11:35 [Bug tree-optimization/37239] New: " bonzini at gnu dot org
2008-08-26 11:37 ` [Bug tree-optimization/37239] " bonzini at gnu dot org
@ 2008-08-27 11:59 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-08-27 12:09 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2008-08-29 4:28 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-08-27 11:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-27 11:58 -------
Hm, I don't know if the loop optimization code can peel the last iteration.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot
| |org, rakdver at gcc dot gnu
| |dot org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2008-08-27 11:58:09
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37239
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/37239] peeling last iteration of a <= loop
2008-08-26 11:35 [Bug tree-optimization/37239] New: " bonzini at gnu dot org
@ 2008-08-26 11:37 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2008-08-27 11:59 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: bonzini at gnu dot org @ 2008-08-26 11:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #1 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-08-26 11:36 -------
Created an attachment (id=16148)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16148&action=view)
benchmark
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37239
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-12-11 22:24 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <bug-37239-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2015-07-02 16:18 ` [Bug tree-optimization/37239] peeling last iteration of a <= loop pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-12-11 22:24 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2008-08-26 11:35 [Bug tree-optimization/37239] New: " bonzini at gnu dot org
2008-08-26 11:37 ` [Bug tree-optimization/37239] " bonzini at gnu dot org
2008-08-27 11:59 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-08-27 12:09 ` bonzini at gnu dot org
2008-08-29 4:28 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
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).