https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35164
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mark at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #13
--- Comment #12 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-15 15:25
---
Fixed. Thanks Zdenek for the initial analysis.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #11 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-15 15:25
---
Subject: Bug 35164
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Feb 15 15:24:19 2008
New Revision: 132345
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=132345
Log:
2008-02-15 Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Z
--- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de 2008-02-15 14:12 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 regression] Unable to coalesce
ab SSA_NAMEs
On Fri, 15 Feb 2008, rakdver at kam dot mff dot cuni dot cz wrote:
> --- Comment #9 from rakdver at kam dot mff dot cuni dot cz 2008-02-15
> 14:06 --
--- Comment #9 from rakdver at kam dot mff dot cuni dot cz 2008-02-15
14:06 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 regression] Unable to coalesce ab SSA_NAMEs
> Yeah, forwprop checks that it may propagate the name SR.40_22, but it doesn't
> check recursively if any of the names occuring in the ADDR_EX
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-15 12:37 ---
With confirming that PR35182 is the same issue as this I produced a patch.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-15 12:36 ---
*** Bug 35182 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35164
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-15 09:23 ---
Yeah, forwprop checks that it may propagate the name SR.40_22, but it doesn't
check recursively if any of the names occuring in the ADDR_EXPR of the rhs
are marked abnormal.
We should check for this before calling f
--- Comment #5 from rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-15 02:59 ---
forwprop3 changes
SR.40_22 = &D.2672_11(ab)->D.2242;
# D.2672_315(ab) = PHI
SR.40_27 = SR.40_22;
D.2705_29 = &SR.40_27->D.2120;
(where the life ranges of D_11 and D_315 do not overlap)
to
SR.40_22 = &D.2672_11(a
--
rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #4 from rakdver at kam dot mff dot cuni dot cz 2008-02-13
04:05 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 regression] Unable to coalesce ab SSA_NAMEs
> Actually it is the call to rewrite_into_loop_closed_ssa inserting these
> PHIs. I don't know if it actually makes sense to speak of loop-clo
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-12 22:45 ---
Reduced testcase without include:
typedef unsigned int size_t;
template class __normal_iterator {
public:
const _Iterator& base() const;
};
template inline
void copy_backward(_BI1 __first, _BI1 __last, _BI2 __resu
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-12 22:03 ---
Actually it is the call to rewrite_into_loop_closed_ssa inserting these
PHIs. I don't know if it actually makes sense to speak of loop-closed SSA form
if we deal with abnormal SSA names - Zdenek?
--
rguenth at g
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-12 12:00 ---
But this one doesn't seem to be inlining related. Until vrp1 pass the var in
question (D.20903) has just one SSA_NAME (D.20903_14) in the whole function,
non-ab, initialized at the beginning of the loop and nothing be
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0
16 matches
Mail list logo
