On Fri, Jan 09, 2015 at 03:10:16PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> Well, you have until the end of next week ;) For GIMPLE this is
> a switch with all cases going to the same basic-block, right?
> I think we optimize that in cleanup_control_expr_graph via the
> single_succ_p case?
No, it is a switch with cases that all look like:
_1 = a; // load
_2 = _1 + 1;
a = _2; // store
So, either if tree-ssa-tail-merge could be tought about loads/stores,
or some other pass would be able to hoist the loads before the switch and
sink the store after the switch, because every switch case does that.
Jakub
