On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 3:01 PM, Richard Guenther <rguent...@suse.de> wrote: > > While we should already be in loop-closed SSA form for virtual > operands most of the time (because we have a virtual use at > the return statement) and loop-closed SSA form for virtuals > is cheap (we only have a single virtual operand now) the following > makes sure that a loop-closed PHI node for virtuals does exist.
Make sense. I think it would be good to add an explanation of what this means in the comment before rewrite_into_loop_closed_ssa, because "liveness" of a memory reference isn't as obvious as that of an ssa register. Did you try this with the header-copying change from PR46590 to make it do only TODO_update_ssa_no_phi? Ciao! Steven
