public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "rguenther at suse dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/50346] Function call foils VRP/jump-threading of redundant predicate on struct member Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 12:44:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-50346-4-Ll8P6olDB5@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-50346-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50346 --- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> 2011-10-12 12:44:15 UTC --- On Wed, 12 Oct 2011, scovich at gmail dot com wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50346 > > --- Comment #4 from Ryan Johnson <scovich at gmail dot com> 2011-10-12 12:40:25 UTC --- > (In reply to comment #3) > > Well, it's a tree optimization issue. It's simple - the local aggregate f > > escapes the function via the member function call to baz: > > > > <bb 5>: > > foo::baz (&f); > > > > and as our points-to analysis is not flow-sensitive for memory/calls this > > causes f to be clobbered by the call to bar > > Is flow-sensitive analysis within single functions prohibitively expensive? All > the papers I can find talk about whole-program analysis, where it's very > expensive in both time and space; the best I could find (CGO'11 best paper) > gets it down to 20-30ms and 2-3MB per kLoC for up to ~300kLoC. It would need a complete rewrite, it isn't integratable into the current solver (which happens to be shared between IPA and non-IPA modes). > > as neither the bodies of baz nor bar are visible there is nothing we can do > > Would knowing the body of bar() help if the latter cannot be inlined? Not at present, but it's possible to improve mod-ref analysis on an IPA level then. Richard.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-10-12 12:44 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2011-09-10 8:23 [Bug c++/50346] New: " scovich at gmail dot com 2011-09-10 13:53 ` [Bug c++/50346] " steven at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-11 23:51 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2011-10-12 10:10 ` [Bug tree-optimization/50346] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-12 12:41 ` scovich at gmail dot com 2011-10-12 12:44 ` rguenther at suse dot de [this message] 2012-03-07 13:31 ` scovich at gmail dot com 2012-03-07 13:40 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2012-03-07 14:29 ` scovich at gmail dot com 2012-03-12 8:57 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2021-08-11 4:31 ` pinskia 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-50346-4-Ll8P6olDB5@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: linkBe 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).