public inbox for gcc-cvs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Aldy Hernandez <aldyh@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-cvs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [gcc r12-4905] path solver: Prefer range_of_expr instead of range_on_edge.
Date: Thu,  4 Nov 2021 14:40:54 +0000 (GMT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211104144054.AD6983857C5E@sourceware.org> (raw)

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6a9678f0b30d36ae13259ad635e175a1e24917a1

commit r12-4905-g6a9678f0b30d36ae13259ad635e175a1e24917a1
Author: Aldy Hernandez <aldyh@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu Nov 4 12:37:16 2021 +0100

    path solver: Prefer range_of_expr instead of range_on_edge.
    
    The range_of_expr method provides better caching than range_on_edge.
    If we have a statement, we can just it and avoid the range_on_edge
    dance.  Plus we can use all the range_of_expr fanciness.
    
    Tested on x86-64 and ppc64le Linux with the usual regstrap.  I also
    verified that the before and after number of threads was the same or
    greater in a suite of .ii files from a bootstrap.
    
    gcc/ChangeLog:
    
            PR tree-optimization/102943
            * gimple-range-path.cc (path_range_query::range_on_path_entry):
            Prefer range_of_expr unless there are no statements in the BB.

Diff:
---
 gcc/gimple-range-path.cc | 18 ++++++++++++++++--
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gcc/gimple-range-path.cc b/gcc/gimple-range-path.cc
index 42309886c94..9175651e896 100644
--- a/gcc/gimple-range-path.cc
+++ b/gcc/gimple-range-path.cc
@@ -135,10 +135,24 @@ void
 path_range_query::range_on_path_entry (irange &r, tree name)
 {
   gcc_checking_assert (defined_outside_path (name));
-  int_range_max tmp;
   basic_block entry = entry_bb ();
-  bool changed = false;
 
+  // Prefer to use range_of_expr if we have a statement to look at,
+  // since it has better caching than range_on_edge.
+  gimple *last = last_stmt (entry);
+  if (last)
+    {
+      if (m_ranger.range_of_expr (r, name, last))
+	return;
+      gcc_unreachable ();
+    }
+
+  // If we have no statement, look at all the incoming ranges to the
+  // block.  This can happen when we're querying a block with only an
+  // outgoing edge (no statement but the fall through edge), but for
+  // which we can determine a range on entry to the block.
+  int_range_max tmp;
+  bool changed = false;
   r.set_undefined ();
   for (unsigned i = 0; i < EDGE_COUNT (entry->preds); ++i)
     {


                 reply	other threads:[~2021-11-04 14:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed

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=20211104144054.AD6983857C5E@sourceware.org \
    --to=aldyh@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-cvs@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).