https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65177
--- Comment #12 from Sebastian Pop <spop at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #11) > That is unless the SEME copier tries to update SSA internally, but that's > painful. I have also tried to update the SSA only in the copied basic blocks: graphite's code generator in sese.c does exactly that only on the path that has been duplicated. sese.c has its own rename_map. In SEME I was not able to access easily the rename maps set by copy_bb: when copying statements, it sets a map of (old_def, new_def) that are used to rename all the uses dominated by the new definition. We could use this rename map to rename all uses in the copied bbs. I think it would be less painful to fix the SSA in a local way than what the patch that I just sent out does: > From a sequencing standpoint, you do your block copying & wire up the new > blocks. Then you have to remove unreachable blocks, rebuild dominators then > update hte SSA graph.
