public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/45505] [4.6 Regression] gfortran.dg/pr25923.f90
Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2011 16:59:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-45505-4-fGf90FJKzb@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-45505-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45505
--- Comment #15 from Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-01-06 16:41:34 UTC ---
I've played around with this a bit more and came to the conclusion
that we could refine SRA heuristics some more to not scalarize this if
we added two more attributes to struct access, one meaning "read as a
scalar" and another for "written as a scalar." (I'm quite confident
this would work, I have a different patch that works too but it uses a
rather ad-hoc approach).
However, I'm not sure whether we should be adding more attributes when
we have already quite a few just in order to be able to make slightly
better judgments about single-field structures like this one. (Maybe
we really could have a location for return instead?). In either case,
it is nothing for stage4. BTW, is this even a 4.6 regression?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-01-06 16:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <bug-45505-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2010-09-30 13:48 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2010-10-08 19:27 ` howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu
2010-11-08 8:24 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2010-11-17 21:20 ` howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu
2011-01-06 16:59 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2011-01-29 12:14 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
2011-01-29 12:36 ` gerald at pfeifer dot com
2011-01-29 18:51 ` uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-02-08 14:17 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-02-09 11:49 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-02-09 12:24 ` jamborm 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-45505-4-fGf90FJKzb@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: link
Be 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).