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.


  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: 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).