>
> unroll you mean. Because unrolling mutates the CFG too much.
> Well - it was just a starting point, populating -Og with as little
> as possible and 100% profitable transforms (in both debug and speed
> metric). In late opts we only do (early opt queue is shared):
Well, and what about early cunrolli?
>
> NEXT_PASS (pass_all_optimizations_g);
> {
> struct opt_pass **p = &pass_all_optimizations_g.pass.sub;
> NEXT_PASS (pass_remove_cgraph_callee_edges);
> NEXT_PASS (pass_strip_predict_hints);
> /* Lower remaining pieces of GIMPLE. */
> NEXT_PASS (pass_lower_complex);
> NEXT_PASS (pass_lower_vector_ssa);
> /* Perform simple scalar cleanup which is constant/copy propagation.
> */
> NEXT_PASS (pass_ccp);
> NEXT_PASS (pass_object_sizes);
> /* Copy propagation also copy-propagates constants, this is
> necessary
> to forward object-size results properly. */
> NEXT_PASS (pass_copy_prop);
> NEXT_PASS (pass_rename_ssa_copies);
> NEXT_PASS (pass_dce);
> /* Fold remaining builtins. */
> NEXT_PASS (pass_fold_builtins);
> /* ??? We do want some kind of loop invariant motion, but we
> possibly
> need to adjust LIM to be more friendly towards preserving
> accurate
> debug information here. */
> NEXT_PASS (pass_late_warn_uninitialized);
> NEXT_PASS (pass_uncprop);
> NEXT_PASS (pass_local_pure_const);
> }
>
> > > > + /* If we know the exit will be taken after peeling, update. */
> > > > + else if (elt->is_exit
> > > > + && elt->bound.ule (double_int::from_uhwi (npeeled)))
> > > > + {
> > > > + basic_block bb = gimple_bb (elt->stmt);
> > > > + edge exit_edge = EDGE_SUCC (bb, 0);
> > > > +
> > > > + if (dump_file && (dump_flags & TDF_DETAILS))
> > > > + {
> > > > + fprintf (dump_file, "Forced exit to be taken: ");
> > > > + print_gimple_stmt (dump_file, elt->stmt, 0, 0);
> > > > + }
> > > > + if (!loop_exit_edge_p (loop, exit_edge))
> > > > + exit_edge = EDGE_SUCC (bb, 1);
> > > > + if (exit_edge->flags & EDGE_TRUE_VALUE)
> > >
> > > I think we can have abnormal/eh exit edges. So I'm not sure you
> > > can, without checking, assume the block ends in a GIMPLE_COND.
> >
> > We can't - those are only edges that are found by the IV analysis and they
> > always test IV with some bound. (it is all done by
> > number_of_iterations_exit)
> > >
> > > See above. Otherwise the overall idea sounds fine.
> >
> > Similarly here, simple exits are always conditionals.
>
> I see. Then the patch is ok (with the comment added).
Thanks, i will ad comment and privatize free_loop_bounds for now.
Honza
>
> Thanks,
> Richard.
