------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-01 02:34
-------
Also for the first loop, we look we do much worse code with -fivopts at least on
powerpc64:
With -fno-ivopts:
offset = (int) (unsigned int) (index >> (int) shift) & 63;
pathp = pathp.109 + 24B;
pathp->offset = offset;
temp.107 = *pathp.109->slot;
pathp->node = temp.107;
D.7848 = (struct radix_tree_node * *) &temp.107->slots + (void * *) ((long unsigned
int) offset * 8);
pathp->slot = D.7848;
shift = shift - 6;
height = height - 1;
without:
offset = (int) (unsigned int) (index >> (int) (shift + (unsigned int) ivtmp.126 *
4294967290)) & 63;
<--- here why not keep the shift decrementing
pathp.155 = ivtmp.137 + &path + 24B;
D.8017 = &path + 24B;
*((int *) ivtmp.137 + &D.8017->offset) = offset;
D.8020 = (struct radix_tree_node * * *) ivtmp.137;
temp.162 = **(D.8020 + &path[0].slot);
*((struct radix_tree_node * *) ivtmp.137 + &D.8017->node) = temp.162;
D.7848 = (struct radix_tree_node * *) &temp.162->slots + (void * *) ((long unsigned
int) offset * 8);
*(D.8020 + &D.8017->slot) = D.7848;
height = height + 4294967295;
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
| |org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18241
