From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9784 invoked by alias); 11 Jun 2011 18:53:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 9776 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Jun 2011 18:53:02 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz (HELO nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz) (195.113.20.16) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 11 Jun 2011 18:52:46 +0000 Received: from localhost (campfire.kam.mff.cuni.cz [195.113.17.153]) by nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FCF49AC6FA; Sat, 11 Jun 2011 20:52:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 29025) id 6AB4CE3370; Sat, 11 Jun 2011 20:52:45 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2011 01:17:00 -0000 From: Zdenek Dvorak To: Tom de Vries Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH PR45098, 7/10] Nowrap limits iterations Message-ID: <20110611185245.GB31436@kam.mff.cuni.cz> References: <4DD3FD79.2020804@codesourcery.com> <20110518211157.GA19788@kam.mff.cuni.cz> <4DD63AE1.7070600@codesourcery.com> <20110521122407.GA22860@kam.mff.cuni.cz> <4DD7FD8F.20909@codesourcery.com> <4DE110D3.8080904@codesourcery.com> <20110530123851.GA29240@kam.mff.cuni.cz> <4DE49E91.60502@codesourcery.com> <20110531080442.GA19683@kam.mff.cuni.cz> <4DF331AF.7030406@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4DF331AF.7030406@codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2011-06/txt/msg00926.txt.bz2 Hi, > > I think a better fix would be to make the nb_iterations_upper_bound semantics > > consistent with that of nb_iterations. Let me try to do it, hopefully this should > > be mostly mechanical, > > > > This patch changes the semantics of nb_iterations_upper_bound and > nb_iterations_estimate, to mean: the amount of latch executions. > > That change is countered at all use sites, except for > tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c:may_eliminate_iv. > > Passed x86_64 bootstrapping and reg-testing. > > OK for trunk? yes, Zdenek