When creating a phi-adjustment along an incoming edge, where the related
argument should use the "hidden basis" directly, I created a situation
where we double-count the subsequent adjustment based on the candidate's
index. The candidate's index shouldn't be taken into account at all for
the edge adjustment; it will be handled in relation to the created phi
basis. This patch fixes that thinko.
I disabled processing of conditional candidates (and associated tests)
on Friday night to allow x86 targets to bootstrap cleanly. This patch
also reinstates the disabled code.
Bootstrapped and tested on powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu and
i686-pc-linux-gnu with no new regressions. Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Bill
gcc:
2013-05-05 Bill Schmidt <wschm...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
* gimple-ssa-strength-reduction.c (slsr_process_phi): Re-enable.
(find_candidates_in_block): Re-enable slsr_process_phi.
(create_phi_basis): Fix double counting of candidate adjustment.
gcc/testsuite:
2013-05-05 Bill Schmidt <wschm...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-32.c: Re-enable.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-33.c: Likewise.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-34.c: Likewise.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-35.c: Likewise.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-36.c: Likewise.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-37.c: Likewise.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-38.c: Likewise.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-32.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-32.c (revision 198611)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-32.c (working copy)
@@ -3,7 +3,6 @@
/* { dg-do compile } */
/* { dg-options "-O3 -fdump-tree-optimized" } */
-/* { dg-skip-if "" { *-*-* } } */
int
f (int s, int c, int i)
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-33.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-33.c (revision 198611)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-33.c (working copy)
@@ -3,7 +3,6 @@
/* { dg-do compile } */
/* { dg-options "-O3 -fdump-tree-optimized" } */
-/* { dg-skip-if "" { *-*-* } } */
int
f (int c, int i)
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-34.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-34.c (revision 198611)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-34.c (working copy)
@@ -3,7 +3,6 @@
/* { dg-do compile } */
/* { dg-options "-O3 -fdump-tree-optimized" } */
-/* { dg-skip-if "" { *-*-* } } */
extern void
g (void);
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-35.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-35.c (revision 198611)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-35.c (working copy)
@@ -4,7 +4,6 @@
/* { dg-do compile } */
/* { dg-options "-O3 -fdump-tree-optimized" } */
-/* { dg-skip-if "" { *-*-* } } */
int
f (int c, int i)
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-36.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-36.c (revision 198611)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-36.c (working copy)
@@ -4,7 +4,6 @@
/* { dg-do compile } */
/* { dg-options "-O3 -fdump-tree-optimized" } */
-/* { dg-skip-if "" { *-*-* } } */
int
f (int s, int c, int i)
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-37.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-37.c (revision 198611)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-37.c (working copy)
@@ -4,7 +4,6 @@
/* { dg-do compile } */
/* { dg-options "-O3 -fdump-tree-optimized" } */
-/* { dg-skip-if "" { *-*-* } } */
int
f (int s, int c, int i)
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-38.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-38.c (revision 198611)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-38.c (working copy)
@@ -4,7 +4,6 @@
/* { dg-do compile } */
/* { dg-options "-O3 -fdump-tree-optimized" } */
-/* { dg-skip-if "" { *-*-* } } */
int
f (int c, int i)
Index: gcc/gimple-ssa-strength-reduction.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/gimple-ssa-strength-reduction.c (revision 198611)
+++ gcc/gimple-ssa-strength-reduction.c (working copy)
@@ -657,9 +657,6 @@ add_cand_for_stmt (gimple gs, slsr_cand_t c)
*slot = c;
}
-// FORNOW: Disable conditional candidate processing until bootstrap
-// issue can be sorted out for i686-pc-linux-gnu.
-#if 0
/* Given PHI which contains a phi statement, determine whether it
satisfies all the requirements of a phi candidate. If so, create
a candidate. Note that a CAND_PHI never has a basis itself, but
@@ -750,7 +747,6 @@ slsr_process_phi (gimple phi, bool speed)
/* Add the candidate to the statement-candidate mapping. */
add_cand_for_stmt (phi, c);
}
-#endif
/* Look for the following pattern:
@@ -1523,12 +1519,8 @@ find_candidates_in_block (struct dom_walk_data *wa
bool speed = optimize_bb_for_speed_p (bb);
gimple_stmt_iterator gsi;
-// FORNOW: Disable conditional candidate processing until bootstrap
-// issue can be sorted out for i686-pc-linux-gnu.
-#if 0
for (gsi = gsi_start_phis (bb); !gsi_end_p (gsi); gsi_next (&gsi))
slsr_process_phi (gsi_stmt (gsi), speed);
-#endif
for (gsi = gsi_start_bb (bb); !gsi_end_p (gsi); gsi_next (&gsi))
{
@@ -2098,7 +2090,7 @@ create_phi_basis (slsr_cand_t c, gimple from_phi,
feeding_def = gimple_assign_lhs (basis->cand_stmt);
else
{
- double_int incr = c->index - basis->index;
+ double_int incr = -basis->index;
feeding_def = create_add_on_incoming_edge (c, basis_name, incr,
e, loc, known_stride);
}
