On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 3:40 AM Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 9:40 AM Andrew Pinski wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 3:42 AM Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 12:00 PM apinski--- via Gcc-patches
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 9:40 AM Andrew Pinski wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 3:42 AM Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 12:00 PM apinski--- via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Andrew Pinski
> > >
> > > The problem here is tree-ssa-forwprop.c
On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 3:42 AM Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 12:00 PM apinski--- via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> >
> > From: Andrew Pinski
> >
> > The problem here is tree-ssa-forwprop.c likes to produce
> > [(void *)_4 + 152B] which is the same as
> > _4 p+
On 10/27/21 3:59 AM, apinski--- via Gcc-patches wrote:
From: Andrew Pinski
The problem here is tree-ssa-forwprop.c likes to produce
[(void *)_4 + 152B] which is the same as
_4 p+ 152 which the rest of GCC likes better.
This implements this transformation back to pointer plus to
improve
On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 12:00 PM apinski--- via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> From: Andrew Pinski
>
> The problem here is tree-ssa-forwprop.c likes to produce
> [(void *)_4 + 152B] which is the same as
> _4 p+ 152 which the rest of GCC likes better.
> This implements this transformation back to
On 27 October 2021 11:59:58 CEST, apinski--- via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>From: Andrew Pinski
>
>The problem here is tree-ssa-forwprop.c likes to produce
> [(void *)_4 + 152B] which is the same as
>_4 p+ 152 which the rest of GCC likes better.
>This implements this transformation back to pointer
From: Andrew Pinski
The problem here is tree-ssa-forwprop.c likes to produce
[(void *)_4 + 152B] which is the same as
_4 p+ 152 which the rest of GCC likes better.
This implements this transformation back to pointer plus to
improve better code generation later on.
OK? Bootstrapped and tested
