On Mon, 3 Sep 2012, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 4:00 PM, Marc Glisse <marc.gli...@inria.fr> wrote:
On Mon, 3 Sep 2012, Richard Guenther wrote:
You shouldn't need the VECTOR_CST handling - constant propagation should
already ensure properly simplified code here (and is the more canonical
place
to handle this).
IIRC, I added VECTOR_CST because of mixed constructor/vector_cst shuffles
(and because it wasn't too hard). If I remove it (I can), I guess some of
the testcases won't work anymore.
I see. If you still have a testcase can you look if CCP does not do
something it should?
I think CCP is working fine, the fold_ternary patch you approved today
tests some of that (without that patch, sometimes ccp1 does half the work
and fre1 finishes it, and since forwprop1 is before fre1, I hit that
case there). Is there a particular scenario you have in mind that might
not be handled?
Here I was concerned with:
x={a,b}; // constructor
y={18,42}; // vector_cst
m={0,3};
__builtin_shuffle(x,y,m) // should be {a,42}
--
Marc Glisse
