On Thu, 12 Jul 2018, Richard Biener wrote:

> 
> This moves a recursion limit installed for PR80887 from 
> vn_lookup_simplify_result to gimple_resimplify* where it also applies
> to a testcase I'm running into with modified VN without ever
> calling vn_lookup_simplify_result.  Basically with VN we are
> not presenting the match.pd patterns with simplified expressions
> but for example we happily feed it ((_50 + 0) + 8) via valueization
> of def-stmt operands.  With the correct IL setup it can easily
> happen that _50 is a leader for itself, thus with _50 = _2 + _3;
> it is value-numbered as a copy but the value doesn't have a leader
> here so _50 becomes the leader.  This effectively turns it into
> _50 = _50;
> 
> Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied to trunk.

And I was too lazy in simplifying vn_lookup_simplify_result.

Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied.

Richard.

2018-07-12  Richard Biener  <rguent...@suse.de>

        * tree-ssa-sccvn.c (vn_lookup_simplify_result): Remove bogus
        left-over from last patch.

Index: gcc/tree-ssa-sccvn.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/tree-ssa-sccvn.c        (revision 262577)
+++ gcc/tree-ssa-sccvn.c        (working copy)
@@ -1669,17 +1669,8 @@ vn_lookup_simplify_result (gimple_match_
        ops[i] = CONSTRUCTOR_ELT (res_op->ops[0], i)->value;
     }
   vn_nary_op_t vnresult = NULL;
-  tree res = vn_nary_op_lookup_pieces (length, (tree_code) res_op->code,
-                                      res_op->type, ops, &vnresult);
-  if (res
-      && mprts_hook)
-    {
-      if (dump_file && (dump_flags & TDF_DETAILS))
-       fprintf (dump_file, "Resetting mprts_hook after too many "
-                "invocations.\n");
-      mprts_hook = NULL;
-    }
-  return res;
+  return vn_nary_op_lookup_pieces (length, (tree_code) res_op->code,
+                                  res_op->type, ops, &vnresult);
 }
 
 /* Return a value-number for RCODE OPS... either by looking up an existing

Reply via email to