On April 24, 2019 11:26:28 PM GMT+02:00, Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com> wrote: >On 4/24/19 4:44 AM, Richard Biener wrote: >>> Given that we can use the lattice copy propagator by just adding the >>> pass to passes.def whereas using the RPN VN actually requires a >little >>> bit of real code (to set up the entry/exits for the relevant SEME >>> regions), I went with the lattice copy propagator. >>> >>> This change adds around .4% instruction executions to my testbed of >.i >>> files. It has no significant impact on the resulting code -- I see >>> different register allocation decisions in a lot of places which >seem to >>> primarily result in reversing arguments to comparisons. >> >> Was there a need to have two copy-prop passes in the early >> DOM/errorneous-path removal where we previously only had >> a single phi-only-prop pass? Is the testcase fixed also when >> doing copy-prop only a single time? >So if we replace phi-only cprop with the lattice propagator and move >the >pass which currently runs before erroneous path isolation so that it >instead runs before erroneous path isolation we're in pretty good >shape. > >isolate-2.c and isolate-4.c needed twiddling -- they need to look later >in the pipeline for an expected simplification, but the simplification >still occurs and it's not too much later than before. > > >I've bootstrapped and regression tested on x86_64, but no other targets >at this point. > >OK for the trunk now?
OK. Richard. > >Jeff
