On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 5:52 PM, Jan Hubicka <hubi...@ucw.cz> wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 7:24 PM, Martin Jambor <mjam...@suse.cz> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 05:11:35PM +0200, Martin Jambor wrote: >> >> this is a new version of the patch which makes ipa analysis produce >> >> predicates for PHI node results, at least at the bottom of the >> >> simplest diamond and semi-diamond CFG subgraphs. This time I also >> >> analyze the conditions again rather than extracting information from >> >> CFG edges, which means I can reason about substantially more PHI >> >> nodes. >> >> >> >> This patch makes us produce loop bounds hint for the pr48636.f90 >> >> testcase. >> >> >> >> Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux. OK for trunk? >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> >> Martin >> >> >> >> >> >> 2012-08-29 Martin Jambor <mjam...@suse.cz> >> >> >> >> * ipa-inline-analysis.c (phi_result_unknown_predicate): New >> >> function. >> >> (predicate_for_phi_result): Likewise. >> >> (estimate_function_body_sizes): Use the above two functions. >> >> >> > >> > This patch, on top of the one doing loop calculations almost always, >> > introduces a number of testsuite failures which somehow I had not >> > caught during my testing. The problem is that either >> > calculate_dominance_info or loop_optimizer_init introduce new SSA >> > names for which there is no index in nonconstant_names which is >> > allocated before the dominance and loop computations. I'm currently >> > bootstrapping and testing the following fix which simply allocates the >> > vector after doing the two computations. If it passes I will commit >> > it straight away so that the regression is fixed before I leave for >> > the weekend, I hope it's obvious enough for that. >> > >> > On the other hand, it would really be better if we did not change >> > function bodies during IPA summary generation phase... >> >> Um ... we shouldn't do this. Can you track down where it happens? I >> suppose it might come from CFG manipulations loop_optimizer_init >> performs when not passing AVOID_CFG_MODIFICATIONS. > > I bet it come from loop noromalization :) (i.e. loop closed form > or preheader construction both needs new SSA names.) > I think it would be best to make pass manager to handle this and make > loop normalization to happen once before all SSA IPA analysis
And compute loops as well. Richard. > Honza >
