--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P2 |P5
Target Milestone|4.2.0 |4.1.0
http://gcc
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-29 18:09 ---
Another one of these I filed this bug after looking at someone else's bug for
code gen regressions.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-27 00:12 ---
I should note that this is a true code gen regression and not just a missed one
at the tree level.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21559
--- Additional Comments From phython at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-31
05:45 ---
I would really prefer option b, where we keep VRP information persistant. That
way fold can use VRP information when available.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21559
--
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |minor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21559
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2005-07-28 22:00 ---
The attached patch is a piece of what will be necessary to fully optimize this
testcase in the future.
The first step is getting VRP to discover that all the paths to the bytes == 0
test have a range of either [0, 0]
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2005-07-27 17:13 ---
It's highly unlikely threading is going to be able to completely eliminate the
test for bytes == 0.
The fundamental problem is the threader has no way of knowing that the loop exit
test (toread != 0) can never be tru
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed||1
Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-05-
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21559
