https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103168
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103168
--- Comment #18 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6180f5c8d6d1dc7b6634c41a46f0f8f5ca2e5b9d
commit r12-5499-g6180f5c8d6d1dc7b6634c41a46f0f8f5ca2e5b9d
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103168
--- Comment #17 from Jan Hubicka ---
Created attachment 51853
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51853=edit
Updated patch
Patch attached. Indeed the oracle ICEs on ref=base=NULL. I also checked that
during cc1plus build we
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103168
--- Comment #16 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #13)
> Concerning comment #10, the problem was that the loop walking all accesses
> was missing loads->every_base check. This is used to represent that we
> track no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103168
--- Comment #15 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
The patch passed testing on x86_64-linux.
The patch passed testing on x86_64-linux.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103168
--- Comment #14 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
This is bit modified patch I am testing. I added pre-computation of the
number of accesses, enabled the path for const functions (in case they
have memory operand), initialized alias sets
This is bit modified patch I am testing. I added pre-computation of the
number of accesses, enabled the path for const functions (in case they
have memory operand), initialized alias sets and clarified the logic
around every_* and global_memory_accesses
PR tree-optimization/103168
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103168
--- Comment #13 from Jan Hubicka ---
Concerning comment #10, the problem was that the loop walking all accesses was
missing loads->every_base check. This is used to represent that we track no
useful info about loads performed at all.
Anyway
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103168
--- Comment #12 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> unsigned p;
> unsigned __attribute__((noinline)) test (void)
> {
> return p;
> }
>
> modref analyzing 'test' (ipa=0) (pure)
> - Analyzing load: p
>- Recording base_set=0 ref_set=0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103168
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
And interestingly for
unsigned p;
unsigned __attribute__((noinline)) test (void)
{
return p;
}
I do not get any modref summary!?
;; Function test (test, funcdef_no=0, decl_uid=1979, cgraph_uid=1,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103168
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 51847
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51847=edit
patch
Looks like I have to exclude summary->global_memory_read since otherwise a
trivial testcase like the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103168
--- Comment #9 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> so indeed that's an issue. So it's a bug fixed, not an optimization
> regression.
I know, but the bug was fixed in unnecesarily generous way preventing a
lot of valid tranforms
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103168
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103168
--- Comment #6 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> bool unknown_memory_access = false;
> if (summary = get_modref_function_summary (stmt, NULL))
> {
> /* First search if we can do someting useful.
> Like for dse it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103168
--- Comment #5 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103168
>
> --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
> (In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #3)
> > This is simple (and fairly common) case we
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103168
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #3)
> This is simple (and fairly common) case we don't optimize
> struct a {
> int a;
> static __attribute__ ((noinline))
> int ret (int v)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103168
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka ---
This is simple (and fairly common) case we don't optimize
struct a {
int a;
static __attribute__ ((noinline))
int ret (int v) {return v;}
__attribute__ ((noinline))
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103168
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-11-11
Summary|Value
19 matches
Mail list logo
