On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 11:25:55AM +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> PR tree-optimization/54717
> * tree-ssa-pre.c (do_partial_partial_insertion): Consider also edges
> with ANTIC_IN.
As Richard is still away, Steven, could you please comment on this?
> Index: tree-ssa-pre.c
> ===================================================================
> *** tree-ssa-pre.c (revision 193503)
> --- tree-ssa-pre.c (working copy)
> *************** do_partial_partial_insertion (basic_bloc
> *** 3525,3531 ****
> may cause regressions on the speed path. */
> FOR_EACH_EDGE (succ, ei, block->succs)
> {
> ! if (bitmap_set_contains_value (PA_IN (succ->dest), val))
> {
> if (optimize_edge_for_speed_p (succ))
> do_insertion = true;
> --- 3525,3532 ----
> may cause regressions on the speed path. */
> FOR_EACH_EDGE (succ, ei, block->succs)
> {
> ! if (bitmap_set_contains_value (PA_IN (succ->dest), val)
> ! || bitmap_set_contains_value (ANTIC_IN (succ->dest), val))
> {
> if (optimize_edge_for_speed_p (succ))
> do_insertion = true;
All I wonder is about the dump message after this change:
if (dump_file && (dump_flags & TDF_DETAILS))
{
fprintf (dump_file, "Skipping partial partial redundancy "
"for expression ");
print_pre_expr (dump_file, expr);
fprintf (dump_file, " (%04d), not partially anticipated "
"on any to be optimized for speed edges\n", val);
}
Isn't "not partially anticipated" out of date, now that it also checks for
being (non-partially) anticipated on some speed edges?
Jakub
