[Bug tree-optimization/18768] Missed ivopts opportunity

2005-03-02 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-03 03:07 --- This has no been fixed on the mainline. I think PRE has changed to not to produce these dead phis. -- What|Removed |Added --

[Bug tree-optimization/18768] Missed ivopts opportunity

2004-12-02 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-02 21:56 --- (In reply to comment #3) > Here's another example of the same thing, minus the cast/double issue. This > one > is strength reduced for 3.4 but not for 4.0. I filed PR 18800 for that, it has to do with loca

[Bug tree-optimization/18768] Missed ivopts opportunity

2004-12-02 Thread pthaugen at us dot ibm dot com
--- Additional Comments From pthaugen at us dot ibm dot com 2004-12-02 21:30 --- Here's another example of the same thing, minus the cast/double issue. This one is strength reduced for 3.4 but not for 4.0. typedef struct { union { unsigned int Init[9]; unsigned char Link[37];

[Bug tree-optimization/18768] Missed ivopts opportunity

2004-12-01 Thread rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Additional Comments From rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-01 21:44 --- There is no additional cost counted for "(double *) coefPtr". The reason why the result with the cast is different is because PRE creates a (dead) phi node when moving the cast out of the loop. This phi no

[Bug tree-optimization/18768] Missed ivopts opportunity

2004-12-01 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-01 21:22 --- Confirmed, I think what is really is happening is not actually due with the cost of [reg +reg] but really with the additional code of "(double *) coefPtr" which we should really be zero. -- Wh