This is something I noticed some time ago and that I remembered when
you added that looping SSA_NAME_VALUE to simplify_control_stmt_condition.
Currently DOM doesn't make sure that when setting
SSA_NAME_VALUE (x) = y that SSA_NAME_VALUE (y) == y, thus you could
get SSA_NAME_VALUE forming a chain until you reach the final value.
Thus the following patch which fixes all occurances and removes the
looping from simplify_control_stmt_condition. Did you have any
testcase when you added that looping?
Note that this is purely by code inspection and I don't have any
testcase where a SSA_NAME_VALUE chain causes missed optimizations
(you'd have to disable a lot of other optimizations before dom1
to be able to create a reasonably simple one).
Anyway - the tree-ssa-dom.c part bootstrapped and tested ok on
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, the tree-ssa-threadedge.c part bootstrapped
ok ontop of that and testing is still in progress.
Ok?
Thanks,
Richard.
2015-02-17 Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de>
* tree-ssa-dom.c (record_equivalences_from_phis): Valueize PHI arg.
(record_const_or_copy_1): Valueize y.
(record_equivalences_from_stmt): Valueize rhs.
* tree-ssa-threadedge.c (simplify_control_stmt_condition):
Remove repeated valueization.
Index: gcc/tree-ssa-dom.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/tree-ssa-dom.c (revision 220751)
+++ gcc/tree-ssa-dom.c (working copy)
@@ -1223,6 +1223,13 @@ record_equivalences_from_phis (basic_blo
if (lhs == t)
continue;
+ /* Valueize t. */
+ if (TREE_CODE (t) == SSA_NAME)
+ {
+ tree tmp = SSA_NAME_VALUE (t);
+ t = tmp ? tmp : t;
+ }
+
/* If we have not processed an alternative yet, then set
RHS to this alternative. */
if (rhs == NULL)
@@ -1566,6 +1573,13 @@ record_conditions (struct edge_info *edg
static void
record_const_or_copy_1 (tree x, tree y, tree prev_x)
{
+ /* Valueize y. */
+ if (TREE_CODE (y) == SSA_NAME)
+ {
+ tree tmp = SSA_NAME_VALUE (y);
+ y = tmp ? tmp : y;
+ }
+
set_ssa_name_value (x, y);
if (dump_file && (dump_flags & TDF_DETAILS))
@@ -2184,18 +2198,25 @@ record_equivalences_from_stmt (gimple st
if (may_optimize_p
&& (TREE_CODE (rhs) == SSA_NAME
|| is_gimple_min_invariant (rhs)))
- {
- if (dump_file && (dump_flags & TDF_DETAILS))
- {
- fprintf (dump_file, "==== ASGN ");
- print_generic_expr (dump_file, lhs, 0);
- fprintf (dump_file, " = ");
- print_generic_expr (dump_file, rhs, 0);
- fprintf (dump_file, "\n");
- }
+ {
+ /* Valueize rhs. */
+ if (TREE_CODE (rhs) == SSA_NAME)
+ {
+ tree tmp = SSA_NAME_VALUE (rhs);
+ rhs = tmp ? tmp : rhs;
+ }
- set_ssa_name_value (lhs, rhs);
- }
+ if (dump_file && (dump_flags & TDF_DETAILS))
+ {
+ fprintf (dump_file, "==== ASGN ");
+ print_generic_expr (dump_file, lhs, 0);
+ fprintf (dump_file, " = ");
+ print_generic_expr (dump_file, rhs, 0);
+ fprintf (dump_file, "\n");
+ }
+
+ set_ssa_name_value (lhs, rhs);
+ }
}
/* Make sure we can propagate &x + CST. */
Index: gcc/tree-ssa-threadedge.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/tree-ssa-threadedge.c (revision 220751)
+++ gcc/tree-ssa-threadedge.c (working copy)
@@ -591,29 +591,13 @@ simplify_control_stmt_condition (edge e,
cond_code = gimple_cond_code (stmt);
/* Get the current value of both operands. */
- if (TREE_CODE (op0) == SSA_NAME)
- {
- for (int i = 0; i < 2; i++)
- {
- if (TREE_CODE (op0) == SSA_NAME
- && SSA_NAME_VALUE (op0))
- op0 = SSA_NAME_VALUE (op0);
- else
- break;
- }
- }
-
- if (TREE_CODE (op1) == SSA_NAME)
- {
- for (int i = 0; i < 2; i++)
- {
- if (TREE_CODE (op1) == SSA_NAME
- && SSA_NAME_VALUE (op1))
- op1 = SSA_NAME_VALUE (op1);
- else
- break;
- }
- }
+ if (TREE_CODE (op0) == SSA_NAME
+ && SSA_NAME_VALUE (op0))
+ op0 = SSA_NAME_VALUE (op0);
+
+ if (TREE_CODE (op1) == SSA_NAME
+ && SSA_NAME_VALUE (op1))
+ op1 = SSA_NAME_VALUE (op1);
if (handle_dominating_asserts)
{
@@ -682,22 +666,11 @@ simplify_control_stmt_condition (edge e,
tree original_lhs = cond;
cached_lhs = cond;
- /* Get the variable's current value from the equivalence chains.
-
- It is possible to get loops in the SSA_NAME_VALUE chains
- (consider threading the backedge of a loop where we have
- a loop invariant SSA_NAME used in the condition. */
- if (cached_lhs)
- {
- for (int i = 0; i < 2; i++)
- {
- if (TREE_CODE (cached_lhs) == SSA_NAME
- && SSA_NAME_VALUE (cached_lhs))
- cached_lhs = SSA_NAME_VALUE (cached_lhs);
- else
- break;
- }
- }
+ /* Get the variable's current value from the equivalence chains. */
+ if (cached_lhs
+ && TREE_CODE (cached_lhs) == SSA_NAME
+ && SSA_NAME_VALUE (cached_lhs))
+ cached_lhs = SSA_NAME_VALUE (cached_lhs);
/* If we're dominated by a suitable ASSERT_EXPR, then
update CACHED_LHS appropriately. */
