On 05/17/2011 09:21 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
> On 05/17/2011 09:10 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
>> Hi Zdenek,
>>
>> I have a patch set for for PR45098.
>>
>> 01_object-size-target.patch
>> 02_pr45098-rtx-cost-set.patch
>> 03_pr45098-computation-cost.patch
>> 04_pr45098-iv-init-cost.patch
>> 05_pr45098-bound-cost.patch
>> 06_pr45098-bound-cost.test.patch
>> 07_pr45098-nowrap-limits-iterations.patch
>> 08_pr45098-nowrap-limits-iterations.test.patch
>> 09_pr45098-shift-add-cost.patch
>> 10_pr45098-shift-add-cost.test.patch
>>
>> I will sent out the patches individually.
>>
> 
> OK for trunk?
> 
> Thanks,
> - Tom

Resubmitting with comment.

This patch introduces 3 new testcases, and modifies an existing test case.
The 3 new testcases need the preceding patches to pass.

The modified test case is ivopt_infer_2.c.

#ifndef TYPE
#define TYPE char*
#endif

extern int a[];

/* Can not infer loop iteration from array -- exit test can not be replaced.  */
void foo (int i_width, TYPE dst, TYPE src1, TYPE src2)
{
  TYPE dstn= dst + i_width;
  TYPE dst0 = dst;
  unsigned long long i = 0;
  for( ; dst <= dstn; )
    {
      dst0[i] = ( src1[i] + src2[i] + 1 +a[i]) >> 1;
      dst++;
      i += 16;
    }
}

The estimates in set_max_iterations for this testcase are:

(gdb) p /x  max_niter
$3 = {low = 0x0, high = 0x1}
(gdb) p /x  max_niter2
$4 = {low = 0x3ffffffffffffff, high = 0x0}

The second estimate is based on a[i], which contains the non-wrapping pointer
arithmetic a+i. Var i is incremented with 16 each iterations, an a is an int
pointer, which explains the factor 64 difference between the 2.

2011-05-05  Tom de Vries  <tom@codesourcery.com>

	PR target/45098
	* gcc.target/arm/ivopts-3.c: New test.
	* gcc.target/arm/ivopts-4.c: New test.
	* gcc.target/arm/ivopts-5.c: New test.
	* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ivopt_infer_2.c: Adapt test.