Hi, > >> I believe that this is something new and is most likely fallout from > >> diego's reworking of the tree to rtl converter. > >> > >> To fix this will require a round of copy propagation, most likely in > >> concert with some induction variable detection, since the most > >> profitable place for this will be in loops. > >> > >> I wonder if any of this effects the rtl level induction variable > >> discovery? > >> > > > > it should not (iv analysis is able to deal with this kind of ivs). > > > does the iv analysis canonize them in a way that we should perhaps > consider moving the auto-inc detection after the iv analysis?
no, iv analysis does not change the program; also, since the code in this particular example is not in any loop, iv analysis is somewhat irrelevant for it. Btw. I would have actually expected this code to be folded to *a_3(D) = D.1543_2; a_4 = a_3(D) + 1; b_5 = b_1(D) + 1; D.1543_6 = *b_5; *a_4 = D.1543_6; a_7 = a_3 + 2; b_8 = b_1 + 2; D.1543_9 = *b_8; *a_7 = D.1543_9; a_10 = a_3 + 3; b_11 = b_1 + 3; D.1543_12 = *b_11; *a_10 = D.1543_12; a_13 = a_3 + 4; b_14 = b_1 + 4; D.1543_15 = *b_14; *a_13 = D.1543_15; etc.; I am fairly sure we used to do this. Zdenek
