https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99101
--- Comment #23 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Just for the record we had the idea to apply the "bolt" of marking the latch
control dependence (as done for possibly infinite loops) for loops containing
stmts with side-effects.
diff --git a/gcc/tree-ssa-dce.c b/gcc/tree-ssa-dce.c
index c027230acdc..c07b60bf25c 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-ssa-dce.c
+++ b/gcc/tree-ssa-dce.c
@@ -695,6 +695,12 @@ propagate_necessity (bool aggressive)
if (bb != ENTRY_BLOCK_PTR_FOR_FN (cfun)
&& !bitmap_bit_p (visited_control_parents, bb->index))
mark_control_dependent_edges_necessary (bb, false);
+ /* If the stmt has side-effects the number of invocations matter.
+ In this case mark the containing loop control. */
+ if (gimple_has_side_effects (stmt)
+ && bb->loop_father->num != 0)
+ mark_control_dependent_edges_necessary (bb->loop_father->latch,
+ false);
}
if (gimple_code (stmt) == GIMPLE_PHI
But while that works for CDDCE1, CDDCE2 is presented a slightly altered CFG
that somehow prevents it from working. Which also means that both loops
need to be considered infinite for the present bolting to work.
