From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
To: Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>
Cc: gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [RFA][PATCH][tree-optimization/78496] 01/03 Do not lose range information from earlier VRP passes
Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2017 08:12:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171204081158.GI2353@tucnak> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b1a2833c-5f5b-fa70-3813-c152daa73552@redhat.com>
On Sun, Dec 03, 2017 at 10:55:27PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> As we touched on in IRC, the EVRP analyzer was doing something stupid
> which caused it to not merge in existing range information under certain
> circumstances.
>
> Consider this fragment:
>
> x_1 = foo ()
> if (x_1 > 2)
> __builtin_unreachable ();
> if (x_1 < 0)
> __builtin_unreachable ();
Note that for say:
x_1 = foo ();
bar (x_1);
if (x_1 > 2)
__builtin_unreachable ();
if (x_1 < 0)
__builtin_unreachable ();
...
further uses of x_1
we can't do that anymore (at least, can't remember it in
SSA_NAME_RANGE_INFO), as bar could not return/could loop etc. Ditto with
any other code in between foo and the unreachable asserts if it doesn't
guarantee that we'll always reach the comparisons after the x_1 setter.
Even
x_1 = foo ();
bar ();
if (x_1 > 2)
__builtin_unreachable ();
if (x_1 < 0)
__builtin_unreachable ();
looks unclean, if bar doesn't return, then we'd just need to hope we don't
add further uses of x_1 in between foo and bar. Some optimizations do stuff
like that, consider foo being a pass-through function.
Jakub
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-12-04 8:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-12-04 5:55 Jeff Law
2017-12-04 8:12 ` Jakub Jelinek [this message]
2017-12-04 15:14 ` Jeff Law
2017-12-04 11:01 ` Richard Biener
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=20171204081158.GI2353@tucnak \
--to=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=law@redhat.com \
/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).