From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-381173-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 17606 invoked by alias); 25 Jan 2012 00:59:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 17593 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Jan 2012 00:59:03 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.9 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; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 00:58:50 +0000
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/51988] value_replacement in PHIOPT should handle even the cases where there are other PHIs even with non equal value
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 04:40:00 -0000
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:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-51988-4-086ZcdxgYn@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-51988-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-51988-4@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
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: 2012-01/txt/msg02848.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51988

--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-01-25 00:58:45 UTC ---
I have a patch which fixes the testcases in comment #3 and comment #5.  The
testcase in comment #0 will be fixed with the patch in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-01/msg01195.html and this new patch. 
Here is a testcase which still cannot be done with the other patch:
int g(int,int);
int f(int t, int c)
{
  int d = 0;
  int e = 0;
  if (t)
    {
      d = t;
      if (c) e = 3;
    }
  else d = 0, e = 0;
  return g(d,e);
}
--- CUT ---
I am going to submit the current patch after testing and leave this bug report
open for the above testcase (since the first one is fixed as the patch I
reference here is approved).