On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 12:54 PM Jeff Law via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
>
>
> On 10/20/2021 12:58 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 1:14 AM Jeff Law via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 10/18/2021 10:54 PM, apinski--- via Gcc-patches wrote:
> >>> From: Andrew Pinski
> >>>
On 10/20/2021 12:58 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 1:14 AM Jeff Law via Gcc-patches
wrote:
On 10/18/2021 10:54 PM, apinski--- via Gcc-patches wrote:
From: Andrew Pinski
Instead of putting a full blow DCE after execute_fixup_cfg, it makes sense
to try to remove the def
On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 1:14 AM Jeff Law via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
>
>
> On 10/18/2021 10:54 PM, apinski--- via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > From: Andrew Pinski
> >
> > Instead of putting a full blow DCE after execute_fixup_cfg, it makes sense
> > to try to remove the defining statement for the store th
On 10/18/2021 10:54 PM, apinski--- via Gcc-patches wrote:
From: Andrew Pinski
Instead of putting a full blow DCE after execute_fixup_cfg, it makes sense
to try to remove the defining statement for the store that is being removed.
Right now we only handle PHI node statements as there needs no
From: Andrew Pinski
Instead of putting a full blow DCE after execute_fixup_cfg, it makes sense
to try to remove the defining statement for the store that is being removed.
Right now we only handle PHI node statements as there needs no extra checks
except for it is only used once in the store stat
