On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 4:16 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > --- 127,145 ---- > /* The locations of the accesses. Vector > indexed by the loop number. */ > > ! /* The following sets are computed on demand. We use two bits per > ! information to represent the not-computed state. */ > ! > ! /* The set of loops in that the memory reference is independent > ! (2 * loop->num) or dependent (2 * loop->num + 1) in. > ! If it is stored in the loop, this store is independent on all other > ! loads and stores. > ! If it is only loaded, then it is independent on all stores in the > loop. */ > ! bitmap loop_dependence; > ! > ! /* The set of memory references on that this reference is independent > ! (2 * mem->id) or dependent (2 * mem->id + 1). */ > ! bitmap ref_dependence; > } *mem_ref_p;
Perhaps add simple inline functions to test those bits, to avoid: > --- 2174,2182 ---- > ref2 = tem; > } > > ! if (bitmap_bit_p (ref1->ref_dependence, 2 * ref2->id)) > return true; > ! if (bitmap_bit_p (ref1->ref_dependence, 2 * ref2->id + 1)) > return false; > > if (dump_file && (dump_flags & TDF_DETAILS)) ? That kind of explicit 2*x+[01] is bound to go wrong at some point. Ciao! Steven
