public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug tree-optimization/45144] SRA optimization issue of bit-field
[not found] <bug-45144-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
@ 2011-05-06 13:40 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-05-06 13:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45144
Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-05-06 13:33:58 UTC ---
Fixed with my current lowering patch which gets rid of the struct A and
union TMP vars completely.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/45144] SRA optimization issue of bit-field
2010-07-30 15:12 [Bug tree-optimization/45144] New: " jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2010-08-02 7:54 ` ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-08-05 3:06 ` jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-08-05 3:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #4 from jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-05 03:06 -------
Subject: Bug 45144
Author: jiez
Date: Thu Aug 5 03:05:35 2010
New Revision: 162897
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=162897
Log:
PR tree-optimization/45144
* tree-sra.c (type_consists_of_records_p): Return false
if the record contains bit-field.
testsuite/
PR tree-optimization/45144
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr45144.c: New test.
Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr45144.c
Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/tree-sra.c
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45144
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/45144] SRA optimization issue of bit-field
2010-07-30 15:12 [Bug tree-optimization/45144] New: " jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2010-08-02 4:34 ` jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-08-02 7:54 ` ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-08-05 3:06 ` jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-08-02 7:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Keywords| |missed-optimization
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-08-02 07:54:22
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45144
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/45144] SRA optimization issue of bit-field
2010-07-30 15:12 [Bug tree-optimization/45144] New: " jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-07-30 17:10 ` [Bug tree-optimization/45144] " jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-07-31 9:25 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-08-02 4:34 ` jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-08-02 7:54 ` ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-08-05 3:06 ` jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-08-02 4:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #3 from jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-02 04:34 -------
Aggregates Copy Propagation should be able to fix this, too.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45144
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/45144] SRA optimization issue of bit-field
2010-07-30 15:12 [Bug tree-optimization/45144] New: " jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-07-30 17:10 ` [Bug tree-optimization/45144] " jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-07-31 9:25 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-08-02 4:34 ` jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-07-31 9:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-31 09:25 -------
I agree. SRA might be even the place to do this lowering in. For ease of
use re-surrecting BIT_FIELD_EXPR from the mem-ref branch might turn out
useful for this.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45144
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/45144] SRA optimization issue of bit-field
2010-07-30 15:12 [Bug tree-optimization/45144] New: " jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-07-30 17:10 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-07-31 9:25 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-07-30 17:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-30 17:09 -------
The solution IMNSHO is to detect adjacent bitfield operations that can be
handled together and lower bitfield ops still at the tree level, though soon
before expansion, rather than disabling SRA for bitfields.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45144
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-05-06 13:40 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <bug-45144-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2011-05-06 13:40 ` [Bug tree-optimization/45144] SRA optimization issue of bit-field rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2010-07-30 15:12 [Bug tree-optimization/45144] New: " jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-07-30 17:10 ` [Bug tree-optimization/45144] " jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-07-31 9:25 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-08-02 4:34 ` jiez at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-08-02 7:54 ` ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-08-05 3:06 ` jiez 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).