On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 3:16 PM Andrew MacLeod wrote:
>
> On 12/7/21 02:12, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 7:39 PM Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> >> On
> >> Well, its only does the fill now when there is range info located on an
> >> outgoing edge of the dominator. Its still used,
On 12/7/21 02:12, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 7:39 PM Andrew MacLeod wrote:
On
Well, its only does the fill now when there is range info located on an
outgoing edge of the dominator. Its still used, just on a much smaller
portion of the graph.
We could do even better if we
On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 7:39 PM Andrew MacLeod wrote:
>
> On 12/6/21 02:27, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 9:42 PM Andrew MacLeod via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> >> When a request is made for the range of an ssa_name at some location,
> >> the first thing we do is invoke
On 12/6/21 02:27, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 9:42 PM Andrew MacLeod via Gcc-patches
wrote:
When a request is made for the range of an ssa_name at some location,
the first thing we do is invoke range_of_stmt() to ensure we have looked
at the definition and have an evaluation
On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 9:42 PM Andrew MacLeod via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> When a request is made for the range of an ssa_name at some location,
> the first thing we do is invoke range_of_stmt() to ensure we have looked
> at the definition and have an evaluation for the name at a global
> level. I
When a request is made for the range of an ssa_name at some location,
the first thing we do is invoke range_of_stmt() to ensure we have looked
at the definition and have an evaluation for the name at a global
level. I recently added a patch which dramatically reduces the call
stack
