On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 3:15 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Richard Guenther
> wrote:
>> I wonder why we cache loop-depth at all ... given that it is a "simple"
>> dereference bb->loop_father->superloops->base.prefix.num. For all
>> the hassle to keep that cache up
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> I wonder why we cache loop-depth at all ... given that it is a "simple"
> dereference bb->loop_father->superloops->base.prefix.num. For all
> the hassle to keep that cache up-to-date, that is.
The cached bb->loop_depth saves two indirect
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Richard Guenther
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Richard Guenther
>> wrote:
>>> On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Steven Bosscher
>>> wrote:
On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 11:16 PM, Steven
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Richard Guenther
> wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Steven Bosscher
>> wrote:
>>> On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 11:16 PM, Steven Bosscher
>>> wrote:
Lots of test cases fail with the attached
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Steven Bosscher
> wrote:
>> On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 11:16 PM, Steven Bosscher
>> wrote:
>>> Lots of test cases fail with the attached patch.
>>
>> Lots still fail after correcting the verifier :-)
>>
>
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 11:16 PM, Steven Bosscher
> wrote:
>> Lots of test cases fail with the attached patch.
>
> Lots still fail after correcting the verifier :-)
>
> 920723-1.c: In function 'f':
> 920723-1.c:14:1: error: bb 13 has loop
On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 11:16 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> Lots of test cases fail with the attached patch.
Lots still fail after correcting the verifier :-)
920723-1.c: In function 'f':
920723-1.c:14:1: error: bb 13 has loop depth 2, should be 1
f (int count, vector_t * pos, double r, double *
Hello Richi,
After a frustrating few days of trying to figure out what *I* was
doing wrong trying to speed up rewrite_into_loop_closed_ssa(), I
finally gave up and looked at the rest of GCC. One wouldn't expect
anything to be very broken in an unpatched tree, after all, but the
kind of failures I
