From: Marc Glisse <marc.glisse@inria.fr>
To: Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>
Cc: "Bin.Cheng" <amker.cheng@gmail.com>,
gcc-patches List <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH GCC][1/2]Feed bound computation to folder in loop split
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 17:45:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1707251936190.1929@stedding.saclay.inria.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFiYyc0K=juL1Z24HJ3_xkqZ1pNsWE9icSuPHoPPnGPHS5qf2Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, 25 Jul 2017, Richard Biener wrote:
>> I think we need Richard to say what the intent is for the valueization
>> function. It is used both to stop looking at defining stmt if the return is
>> NULL, and to replace/optimize one SSA_NAME with another, but currently it
>> seems hard to prevent looking at the defining statement without preventing
>> from looking at the SSA_NAME at all.
>
> Yeah, this semantic overloading is an issue. For gimple_build we have nothing
> to "valueize" but we only use it to tell genmatch that it may not look at the
> SSA_NAME_DEF_STMT.
>
>> I guess we'll need a fix in genmatch...
>
> I'll have a look tomorrow.
My impression yesterday was that we could replace the current do_valueize
wrapper by 2 wrappers (without touching the valueize callbacks):
- may_check_def_stmt, which returns a bool corresponding to the current
do_valueize != NULL_TREE
- maybe_valueize, which tries to valueize, but if it gets a NULL_TREE,
it returns its argument unchanged.
Not very confident about it though.
--
Marc Glisse
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-25 17:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-06-14 13:07 Bin Cheng
2017-06-16 10:49 ` Richard Biener
2017-06-16 13:06 ` Bin.Cheng
2017-06-16 13:10 ` Richard Biener
2017-06-16 13:31 ` Bin.Cheng
2017-06-16 16:16 ` Richard Biener
2017-06-16 16:23 ` Bin.Cheng
2017-06-16 16:48 ` Marc Glisse
2017-06-16 16:58 ` Bin.Cheng
2017-06-16 17:04 ` Andrew Pinski
2017-07-24 11:45 ` Bin.Cheng
2017-07-24 12:16 ` Marc Glisse
2017-07-24 13:49 ` Bin.Cheng
2017-07-24 13:59 ` Marc Glisse
2017-07-24 14:06 ` Bin.Cheng
2017-07-24 14:31 ` Marc Glisse
2017-07-24 14:37 ` Bin.Cheng
2017-07-24 14:52 ` Marc Glisse
2017-07-25 14:32 ` Richard Biener
2017-07-25 17:45 ` Marc Glisse [this message]
2017-07-26 7:48 ` Richard Biener
2017-07-26 9:08 ` Richard Sandiford
2017-07-26 9:38 ` Marc Glisse
2017-07-26 9:45 ` Richard Sandiford
2017-07-26 9:57 ` Marc Glisse
2017-07-26 11:13 ` Richard Biener
2017-07-26 11:46 ` 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=alpine.DEB.2.20.1707251936190.1929@stedding.saclay.inria.fr \
--to=marc.glisse@inria.fr \
--cc=amker.cheng@gmail.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=richard.guenther@gmail.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).