From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-338369-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 13906 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2010 11:13:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 13861 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Nov 2010 11:13:19 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.8 required=5.0	tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 25 Nov 2010 11:13:15 +0000
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/45685] [4.6 Regression] missed conditional move opportunity in loop
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.6.0
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: CC
Message-ID: <bug-45685-4-JQTWXCPmDM@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-45685-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-45685-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2010 11:16:00 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2010-11/txt/msg03102.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45685

Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org,
                   |                            |spop at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #14 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-11-25 11:13:06 UTC ---
First of all tree if-conversion goes crazy here.

What Jakub refers to (optimizing the constants) should be done while we
still have the PHIs around:

<bb 5>:
  # val_4 = PHI <1(4), -1(3)>
  # prephitmp.26_45 = PHI <-1(4), 1(3)>
  # prephitmp.27_46 = PHI <4294967295(4), 1(3)>
  # prephitmp.27_48 = PHI <1(4), 4294967295(3)>

here at least prephitmp.26_45 = -val_4, prephitmp.27_46 = -prephitmp.27_48,
etc.

Now - we can teach PRE not to do PHI insertions for sign changes or
negations, but it's hard to tell if the insertion involved further
simplifications that are worthwhile.

We go from

<bb 5>:
  # val_4 = PHI <1(4), -1(11)>
...
  if (D.4323_24 != i_19)
    goto <bb 6>;
  else
    goto <bb 12>;

<bb 12>:
  goto <bb 7>;

<bb 6>:
  val_25 = -val_4;

<bb 7>:
  # val_3 = PHI <val_4(12), val_25(6)>
...
  D.4326_28 = (unsigned int) val_3;

to the above, inserting for -val_4 and (unsigned int) val_3.

That said, if-conversion should be improved for the case of generating
constants.