https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61837
Jiu Fu Guo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61837
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jiu Fu Guo :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:aafa38b5bfed5e3eff258aa5354ed928f4986709
commit r12-2585-gaafa38b5bfed5e3eff258aa5354ed928f4986709
Author: Jiufu Guo
Date: Thu Jul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61837
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Xiong Hu Luo :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8a15faa730f99100f6f3ed12663563356ec5a2c0
commit r11-407-g8a15faa730f99100f6f3ed12663563356ec5a2c0
Author: Xionghu Luo
Date: Thu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61837
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
Note the unswitching pass has special code to hoist guards of inner loops
steming from loop header copying. That could possibly be enabled at -O2
since it doesn't come with a size penalty due to loop
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61837
--- Comment #9 from luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #8)
> -funswitch-loops changes things like
>
> for (...) {
> if (...)
> ...1;
> else
> ...2;
> }
>
> into
>
> if (...) {
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61837
--- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool ---
-funswitch-loops changes things like
for (...) {
if (...)
...1;
else
...2;
}
into
if (...) {
for (...)
...1;
} else {
for (...)
...2;
}
which often
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61837
--- Comment #7 from luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #6)
> But -funswitch-loops is much stronger than we want here, and the wrong
> thing to use at -O2 (it often generates *slower* code!)
Not sure your
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61837
--- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool ---
But -funswitch-loops is much stronger than we want here, and the wrong
thing to use at -O2 (it often generates *slower* code!)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61837
--- Comment #5 from luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
"-O2 -funswitch-loops" could generate expected code for s<=0, unswitch-loops is
enabled by -O3, so this issue is reduced to duplicate of PR67288?
foo:
.LFB0:
.cfi_startproc
cmpwi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61837
--- Comment #4 from Segher Boessenkool ---
If the ble 7,.L7 is taken once, it will be taken all of the time, since
cr7 isn't assigned to any more -- and then the whole loop does nothing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61837
luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61837
--- Comment #2 from Bill Schmidt ---
Also needs to hoist the "addi 8,4,-1" out to permit this. That instruction is
also invariant.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61837
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61837
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
14 matches
Mail list logo
