@gmail.com]
>> >> Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 5:40 PM
>> >> To: Jiangning Liu
>> >> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
>> >> Subject: Re: A problem about loop store motion
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 9:54 AM, Jiangning Liu
&g
> -Original Message-
> From: gcc-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of
> Richard Guenther
> Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 6:19 PM
> To: Jiangning Liu
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: A problem about loop store motion
>
> On Tu
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 10:57 AM, Jiangning Liu wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Richard Guenther [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 5:40 PM
>> To: Jiangning Liu
>> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
>> Subject: Re:
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Guenther [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 5:40 PM
> To: Jiangning Liu
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: A problem about loop store motion
>
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 9:54 AM, Jiangnin
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 9:54 AM, Jiangning Liu wrote:
>> The MEM form is more "canonical", so the loop SM machinery to detect
>> equality should be adjusted accordingly. Alternatively you can teach
>> PRE insertion to strip off the MEM if possible (though
>> fold_stmt_inplace should
>> arelady do
> The MEM form is more "canonical", so the loop SM machinery to detect
> equality should be adjusted accordingly. Alternatively you can teach
> PRE insertion to strip off the MEM if possible (though
> fold_stmt_inplace should
> arelady do this if possible).
Richard,
Thank you! You are right. I n
On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 9:46 AM, Jiangning Liu wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: gcc-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of
>> Jiangning Liu
>> Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 5:53 PM
>> To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
>>
> -Original Message-
> From: gcc-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of
> Jiangning Liu
> Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 5:53 PM
> To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: A problem about loop store motion
>
> Hi,
>
> For this small tes
Hi,
For this small test case,
int *l, *r;
int test_func(void)
{
int i;
int direction;
static int pos;
pos = 0;
direction = 1;
for ( i = 0; i <= 400; i++ )
{
if ( direction == 0 )
pos = l[pos];
