On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 3:00 PM, Christophe Lyon
wrote:
> On 3 May 2016 at 11:07, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>> On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 10:02 AM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 5:51 PM, Bin.Cheng
On 3 May 2016 at 11:07, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 10:02 AM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 5:51 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 10:18 AM, Richard Biener
>>>
On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 10:02 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 5:51 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 10:18 AM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 5:49 PM, Bin Cheng
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 5:51 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 10:18 AM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 5:49 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> Currently tree if-conversion only supports PHIs
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 4:51 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 10:18 AM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 5:49 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> Currently tree if-conversion only supports PHIs
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 10:18 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 5:49 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
>> Hi,
>> Currently tree if-conversion only supports PHIs with no more than two
>> arguments unless the loop is marked with "simd pragma".
On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 5:49 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
> Currently tree if-conversion only supports PHIs with no more than two
> arguments unless the loop is marked with "simd pragma". This patch makes
> such PHIs supported unconditionally if they have no more than
Hi,
Currently tree if-conversion only supports PHIs with no more than two arguments
unless the loop is marked with "simd pragma". This patch makes such PHIs
supported unconditionally if they have no more than MAX_PHI_ARG_NUM arguments,
thus cases like PR56541 can be fixed. Note because a