public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "kyukhin at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/62217] DOM confuses complete unrolling which in turn causes VRP to warn Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 07:45:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-62217-4-1u2YAOqTX5@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-62217-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62217 --- Comment #3 from Kirill Yukhin <kyukhin at gcc dot gnu.org> --- As long as I understand `remove_exits_and_undefined_stmts' iterate loop boundaries set marking `unreachable' stmts w/ impossible bounds. For the example we have: - for true edge basic block 6, loop depth 1 pred: 5 g_x[b_6(D)] = *x1_7(D); goto <bb 8>; succ: 8 - for false edge basic block 7, loop depth 1 pred: 5 g_x[i_14] = *x2_9(D); succ: 8 I suspect, that the problem is that `b' was propagated along `true' edge and replaced use of `i'. This removed reference to g_x from boundaries analysis for that edge: no IV is used there explicitly, only implicitly as b == i. Hence this stmt didn't hit boundaries set of the loop and wasn't marked as unreachable. BTW: this code survive rest of optimizations: movl (%edx), %edx cmpl $4, %eax movl %edx, g_x+12 jle .L1 movl (%ebx), %eax movl %eax, g_x+16 ;; REDUNDANT Looks like not simple warning, but also unnecessary code was generated.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-08-22 7:45 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2014-08-21 13:31 [Bug tree-optimization/62217] New: Extra iteration peeled during cunroll. Makes VRP warn kyukhin at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-08-22 4:41 ` [Bug tree-optimization/62217] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-08-22 7:00 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-08-22 7:45 ` kyukhin at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2014-08-26 11:16 ` [Bug tree-optimization/62217] [4.9/5 Regression] DOM confuses complete unrolling which in turn causes VRP to warn rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-10-30 10:39 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-11-24 13:07 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-02-12 22:42 ` law at redhat dot com 2015-02-13 9:16 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-02-13 23:29 ` law at redhat dot com 2015-02-16 8:55 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2015-02-16 19:05 ` law at redhat dot com 2015-02-17 9:44 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2015-02-17 14:31 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-02-17 15:02 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-02-17 15:40 ` law at redhat dot com 2015-02-17 20:01 ` law at redhat dot com 2015-02-18 9:49 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-02-18 9:49 ` [Bug tree-optimization/62217] [4.9 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-06-26 19:59 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-06-26 20:29 ` jakub 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-62217-4-1u2YAOqTX5@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).