From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10949 invoked by alias); 18 Oct 2004 08:22:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 10905 invoked from network); 18 Oct 2004 08:22:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz) (195.113.31.123) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 18 Oct 2004 08:22:33 -0000 Received: by atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz (Postfix, from userid 29025) id 31CEB4B4424; Mon, 18 Oct 2004 10:22:06 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 08:37:00 -0000 From: Zdenek Dvorak To: Daniel Berlin Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Patch ping ^ 2 Message-ID: <20041018082206.GA12587@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> References: <20041017202245.GA27479@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <1098046074.31401.29.camel@dberlin.org> <20041017214316.GA1576@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <1098055730.31401.50.camel@dberlin.org> <20041017234336.GA14356@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <1098059218.31401.75.camel@dberlin.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1098059218.31401.75.camel@dberlin.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i X-SW-Source: 2004-10/txt/msg01458.txt.bz2 Hello, I have thought about the situation a bit more. My opinion now is: 1) Unless your patch to make voperands represent output dependences again (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-10/msg01437.html) gets into mainline, the rewrite of store motion (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-09/msg01120.html) is the best choice. 2) If your patch gets to mainline, it will be still necessary to rewrite store motion to fix its current compile time problems. It will however be useful to use SSA form for voperands then. This however will be just a fairly small change over http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-09/msg01120.html, since the only thing that will need to be changed is the way how the information about aliasing is determined. Any of these options is fine with me, although 2) will be easier to update when your changes to aliasing info representation are included (it should just work without any further changes, in fact, but of course one cannot be completely sure). Note that there are no real dependences between the two patches, i.e. they can be reviewed independently. Zdenek