From: Aldy Hernandez <aldyh@redhat.com>
To: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
Cc: gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Speedup path discovery in predicate::use_cannot_happen
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2022 17:24:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGm3qMXbOgoQ_ZB_ZoBzRyM4BpW3cZ+7q-=ij=kksibi1uC2FQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <80496.122082308163400337@us-mta-60.us.mimecast.lan>
On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 2:16 PM Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de> wrote:
>
> The following reverts a hunk from r8-5789-g11ef0b22d68cd1 that
> made compute_control_dep_chain start from function entry rather
> than the immediate dominator of the source block of the edge with
> the undefined value on the PHI node. Reverting at that point
> does not reveal any testsuite FAIL, in particular the added
> testcase still passes. The following adjusts this to the other
> function that computes predicates that hold on the PHI incoming
> edges with undefined values, predicate::init_from_phi_def, which
> starts at the immediate dominator of the PHI. That's much less
> likely to run into the CFG walking limit.
>
> Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
>
> Aldy - you did this change, do you remember anything here? In
> fact the whole thing that's now called predicate::use_cannot_happen
> seems to be redundant - the two testcases attributed to its history
> do not fail when that's disabled, nor did they fail when it was
> introduced. In principle whats now called predicate::superset_of
> should cover this (but different implementation limits might apply).
OMG, I'm drawing a complete blank here. I have no recollection of
this. I'm tempted to say either my account was hacked or that old
code was all wrong ;-).
Sorry.
Aldy
next parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-23 15:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <80496.122082308163400337@us-mta-60.us.mimecast.lan>
2022-08-23 15:24 ` Aldy Hernandez [this message]
2022-08-24 6:48 ` Richard Biener
2022-08-23 12:16 Richard Biener
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-08-23 12:16 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='CAGm3qMXbOgoQ_ZB_ZoBzRyM4BpW3cZ+7q-=ij=kksibi1uC2FQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=aldyh@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=rguenther@suse.de \
/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).