From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24335 invoked by alias); 12 Dec 2002 21:00:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 24324 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 21:00:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx2.redhat.com) (12.150.115.133) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 21:00:19 -0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBCKuqJ13433; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 15:56:52 -0500 Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBCL0Gs06459; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 16:00:16 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain (frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.24.27]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBCL0B712531; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:00:11 -0800 Received: (from rth@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.6) id gBCL0Ac28944; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:00:10 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: localhost.localdomain: rth set sender to rth@redhat.com using -f Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:03:00 -0000 From: Richard Henderson To: Daniel Berlin Cc: Dale Johannesen , "Sanjiv Kumar Gupta, Noida" , gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: possible gcse failure: not able to eliminate redundant loads Message-ID: <20021212210010.GD23940@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: Richard Henderson , Daniel Berlin , Dale Johannesen , "Sanjiv Kumar Gupta, Noida" , gcc@gcc.gnu.org References: <5BF74486-0D57-11D7-AD6E-000393D76DAA@apple.com> <071040D0-0D74-11D7-AE57-000393575BCC@dberlin.org> <20021212200530.GA23940@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg00664.txt.bz2 On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 03:26:44PM -0500, Daniel Berlin wrote: > > Not for this > > simple case. If these memories are known to not alias, then they > > should be hoisted out of the loop by load_mems. > Maybe the load, but not the store. Both. We hoist values read-write when we can. r~