> PR tree-optimization/46590
> * cfgexpand.c: Revert last change (r183305).
> * gimplify.c (gimplify_bind_expr): Add clobbers for all non-gimple
> regs.
> * tree-eh.c (cleanup_empty_eh): Try to optimize clobbers before
> checking for emptiness.
I have installed
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 24 Jan 2012, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
>> > + && !is_gimple_reg (t))
>> > +
>>
>> Ok with the excessive vertical space removed.
>
> Actually the patch as is was regressing some testcases (pr48794.f90, fixed
> with an tr
Hi,
On Tue, 24 Jan 2012, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > + && !is_gimple_reg (t))
> > +
>
> Ok with the excessive vertical space removed.
Actually the patch as is was regressing some testcases (pr48794.f90, fixed
with an tree-eh change in another thread) and pack9.adb, which is fixed
with
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, 21 Jan 2012, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>
>> > Trivially fixing the thinko (iterating over (work bit-and
>> > old_conflict) in the first inner loop) would fix the testcase but in
>> > general create too few conflicts, i.e. generate w
Hi,
On Sat, 21 Jan 2012, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > Trivially fixing the thinko (iterating over (work bit-and
> > old_conflict) in the first inner loop) would fix the testcase but in
> > general create too few conflicts, i.e. generate wrong code. I need
> > some time to think about this again.
> It was supposed to not change the set of conflicts, no. But I made a
> thinko, and sometimes too many conflicts are generated. On the testcases
> I tried that wasn't the case, so thanks for finding one :)
You're welcome. In fact, I should have installed it in the gnat.dg testsuite
long ago b
Hi,
On Fri, 20 Jan 2012, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> Is it supposed to change the generated code or...?
It was supposed to not change the set of conflicts, no. But I made a
thinko, and sometimes too many conflicts are generated. On the testcases
I tried that wasn't the case, so thanks for finding
> I've committed (r183305) a slightly changed variant that merges the two
> outer bitmap loops again, like so:
>
> + EXECUTE_IF_AND_COMPL_IN_BITMAP (work, old_conflicts, 0, i,
> bi) {
> unsigned j;
> bitmap_iterator bj;
> - EXECUTE_IF_
Hi,
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > Regstrapping in progress on x86_64-linux, okay for trunk?
>
> Ok.
I've committed (r183305) a slightly changed variant that merges the two
outer bitmap loops again, like so:
+ EXECUTE_IF_AND_COMPL_IN_BITMAP (work, old_conflicts,
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 6:18 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the stack-var conflict generation code needs 13 (out of 34) seconds, with
> -O0 on the second testcase of PR46590. Most of the time is spent in
> generating the same conflicts again and again at each basic block (the
> time right now
Hi,
the stack-var conflict generation code needs 13 (out of 34) seconds, with
-O0 on the second testcase of PR46590. Most of the time is spent in
generating the same conflicts again and again at each basic block (the
time right now is O(nr-of-bbs * N^2) where the number of conflicts is
O(N^2)
11 matches
Mail list logo
