> Am 13.04.2023 um 17:49 schrieb Andrew MacLeod :
>
>
>> On 4/13/23 09:56, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 10:55 PM Andrew MacLeod wrote:
>>>
>>> On 4/12/23 07:01, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 12:59 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Would be nice.
>
> Am 13.04.2023 um 17:49 schrieb Andrew MacLeod :
>
>
>> On 4/13/23 09:56, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 10:55 PM Andrew MacLeod wrote:
>>>
>>> On 4/12/23 07:01, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 12:59 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Would be nice.
>
On 4/13/23 09:56, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 10:55 PM Andrew MacLeod wrote:
On 4/12/23 07:01, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 12:59 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Would be nice.
Though, I'm afraid it still wouldn't fix the PR101912 testcase, because
it has
On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 10:55 PM Andrew MacLeod wrote:
>
>
> On 4/12/23 07:01, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 12:59 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >>
> >> Would be nice.
> >>
> >> Though, I'm afraid it still wouldn't fix the PR101912 testcase, because
> >> it has exactly what
On 4/12/23 07:01, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 12:59 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Would be nice.
Though, I'm afraid it still wouldn't fix the PR101912 testcase, because
it has exactly what happens in this PR, undefined phi arg from the
pre-header and uses of the previous
On 4/12/23 04:20, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 07:52:29PM -0400, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
This bootstraps on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu with that single regression, which I
have XFAILed for now. OK for trunk?
Yes.
Once Jakub verifies it actually fixes
the execution problem.
On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 12:59 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 11:12:17AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > 108139 fixed this by not evaluating any equivalences if the equivalence
> > > was the LHS.
> > >
> > > What it missed, was it possible we are calculating the range of
On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 11:12:17AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > 108139 fixed this by not evaluating any equivalences if the equivalence
> > was the LHS.
> >
> > What it missed, was it possible we are calculating the range of a_3.
> > b_2 is not defined in a phi node, so it happily used the
On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 1:52 AM Andrew MacLeod wrote:
>
> This is a carry over from PR 108139.
>
> When we have a PHI node which has 2 arguments and one is undefined, we
> create an equivalence between the LHS and the non-undefined PHI
> argument. THis allows us to perform certain optimizations.
On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 07:52:29PM -0400, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> This bootstraps on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu with that single regression, which I
> have XFAILed for now. OK for trunk?
Yes.
> Once Jakub verifies it actually fixes
> the execution problem. we have no executable test . yet.
I
This is a carry over from PR 108139.
When we have a PHI node which has 2 arguments and one is undefined, we
create an equivalence between the LHS and the non-undefined PHI
argument. THis allows us to perform certain optimizations.
The problem is, when we are evaluating range-on-entry in the
11 matches
Mail list logo
