* loop unswitching is sensitive to edge order
@ 2004-09-25 13:22 Ben Elliston
2004-09-25 13:40 ` Zdenek Dvorak
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ben Elliston @ 2004-09-25 13:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zdenek Dvorak; +Cc: gcc
Hi Zdenek,
The following patch of yours seems to add some code that is sensitive
to the order of edges in the bb edge list. Am I right?
I could try and fix it myself, but I figure you know the code best.
Is it possible that you can correct it?
Thanks, Ben
2004-09-23 Zdenek Dvorak <rakdver@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>
* cfgloop.h (update_single_exits_after_duplication): Declare.
(loopify, split_loop_bb): Declaration changed.
* cfgloopmanip.c (split_loop_bb): Take void * as an argument instead
of rtx.
(loopify): Added redirect_all_edges argument.
(update_single_exits_after_duplication): Export.
* loop-unswitch.c (unswitch_loop): Changed due to loopify change.
* tree-flow.h (tree_duplicate_loop_to_header_edge,
tree_ssa_loop_version): Declare.
* tree-ssa-loop-manip.c (copy_phi_node_args, rename_variables,
set_phi_def_stmts, tree_duplicate_loop_to_header_edge,
lv_adjust_loop_header_phi, lv_adjust_loop_entry_edge,
lv_update_pending_stmts, tree_ssa_loop_version): New functions.
* tree-ssa-loop-unswitch.c: New file.
* Makefile.in (tree-ssa-loop-unswitch.o): Add.
* timevar.def (TV_TREE_LOOP_UNSWITCH): New timevar.
* tree-flow.h (tree_ssa_unswitch_loops): Declare.
* tree-optimize.c (init_tree_optimization_passes): Add pass_unswitch.
* tree-pass.h (pass_unswitch): Declare.
* tree-ssa-loop.c (tree_ssa_loop_unswitch,
gate_tree_ssa_loop_unswitch, pass_unswitch): New pass.
* doc/passes.texi: Documen tree level loop unswitching.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: loop unswitching is sensitive to edge order
2004-09-25 13:22 loop unswitching is sensitive to edge order Ben Elliston
@ 2004-09-25 13:40 ` Zdenek Dvorak
2004-09-25 13:47 ` Ben Elliston
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Zdenek Dvorak @ 2004-09-25 13:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ben Elliston; +Cc: gcc
Hello,
> The following patch of yours seems to add some code that is sensitive
> to the order of edges in the bb edge list. Am I right?
I do not know, since I do not understand what you mean. What problem
do you see with the code?
Zdenek
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: loop unswitching is sensitive to edge order
2004-09-25 13:40 ` Zdenek Dvorak
@ 2004-09-25 13:47 ` Ben Elliston
2004-09-25 14:12 ` Zdenek Dvorak
2004-09-25 14:40 ` Steven Bosscher
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ben Elliston @ 2004-09-25 13:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zdenek Dvorak; +Cc: gcc
Zdenek Dvorak <rakdver@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> writes:
> > The following patch of yours seems to add some code that is sensitive
> > to the order of edges in the bb edge list. Am I right?
>
> I do not know, since I do not understand what you mean. What problem
> do you see with the code?
My edges-in-vectors patch breaks when integrated with your patch. I
was able to fix that breakage by modifying my code so that new
elements are inserted at the head of the vector and that vector order
is maintained when elements are removed (ie. it emulates the behaviour
of the existing pred and succ linked lists).
My understanding is that none of the code in GCC should depend on the
order of edges in their containers. This is the first time I've
encountered such behaviour.
Ben
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: loop unswitching is sensitive to edge order
2004-09-25 13:47 ` Ben Elliston
@ 2004-09-25 14:12 ` Zdenek Dvorak
2004-09-25 15:14 ` Ben Elliston
2004-09-25 14:40 ` Steven Bosscher
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Zdenek Dvorak @ 2004-09-25 14:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ben Elliston; +Cc: gcc
Hello,
> > > The following patch of yours seems to add some code that is sensitive
> > > to the order of edges in the bb edge list. Am I right?
> >
> > I do not know, since I do not understand what you mean. What problem
> > do you see with the code?
>
> My edges-in-vectors patch breaks when integrated with your patch. I
> was able to fix that breakage by modifying my code so that new
> elements are inserted at the head of the vector and that vector order
> is maintained when elements are removed (ie. it emulates the behaviour
> of the existing pred and succ linked lists).
>
> My understanding is that none of the code in GCC should depend on the
> order of edges in their containers. This is the first time I've
> encountered such behaviour.
as far as I am aware, there is no such dependence in unswitching. What
exactly breaks with your patch?
Zdenek
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: loop unswitching is sensitive to edge order
2004-09-25 13:47 ` Ben Elliston
2004-09-25 14:12 ` Zdenek Dvorak
@ 2004-09-25 14:40 ` Steven Bosscher
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Steven Bosscher @ 2004-09-25 14:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ben Elliston, Zdenek Dvorak; +Cc: gcc
On Saturday 25 September 2004 13:40, Ben Elliston wrote:
> Zdenek Dvorak <rakdver@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> writes:
> > > The following patch of yours seems to add some code that is sensitive
> > > to the order of edges in the bb edge list. Am I right?
> >
> > I do not know, since I do not understand what you mean. What problem
> > do you see with the code?
>
> My edges-in-vectors patch breaks when integrated with your patch. I
> was able to fix that breakage by modifying my code so that new
> elements are inserted at the head of the vector and that vector order
> is maintained when elements are removed (ie. it emulates the behaviour
> of the existing pred and succ linked lists).
>
> My understanding is that none of the code in GCC should depend on the
> order of edges in their containers. This is the first time I've
> encountered such behaviour.
Can you post your merge patch so everyone can see what is going on?
Gr.
Steven
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: loop unswitching is sensitive to edge order
2004-09-25 14:12 ` Zdenek Dvorak
@ 2004-09-25 15:14 ` Ben Elliston
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ben Elliston @ 2004-09-25 15:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zdenek Dvorak; +Cc: gcc
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 903 bytes --]
Zdenek Dvorak <rakdver@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> writes:
> as far as I am aware, there is no such dependence in unswitching.
> What exactly breaks with your patch?
Numerous GCC test cases at -O3. For example:
Executing on host: /home/bje/build/head/gcc/xgcc -B/home/bje/build/head/gcc/ -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -w -c -o 20020109-1.o /home/bje/source/gcc-head/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/20020109-1.c (timeout = 300)
/home/bje/source/gcc-head/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/20020109-1.c: In function 'foo':
/home/bje/source/gcc-head/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/20020109-1.c:15: internal compiler error: in tree_split_edge, at tree-cfg.c:3032
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See <URL:http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
compiler exited with status 1
I've attached a patch, as Steven asked, so others can take a look.
[-- Attachment #2: PATCH.bz2 --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 55761 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 5 bytes --]
Ben
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-09-25 13:22 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-09-25 13:22 loop unswitching is sensitive to edge order Ben Elliston
2004-09-25 13:40 ` Zdenek Dvorak
2004-09-25 13:47 ` Ben Elliston
2004-09-25 14:12 ` Zdenek Dvorak
2004-09-25 15:14 ` Ben Elliston
2004-09-25 14:40 ` Steven Bosscher
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).