http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52134
--- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de
2012-03-14 09:39:31 UTC ---
On Tue, 13 Mar 2012, pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52134
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52134
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52134
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-13
13:47:43 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Mar 13 13:47:35 2012
New Revision: 185334
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=185334
Log:
2012-03-13 Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52134
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52134
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-13
22:08:12 UTC ---
CCP could also remove the :
Visiting statement:
D.1713_2 = t_1(D) * 4;
which is likely CONSTANT
Lattice value changed to CONSTANT Lattice value changed to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52134
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-13
22:17:35 UTC ---
See how the lattice's already have its last 3 bits unset. In fact I think we
should only do this in the ccp/vrp passes to remove the rather than fold.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52134
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52134
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||TREE
---
