[Bug tree-optimization/43984] PRE misses full-redundancies, inserts into loops

2010-05-06 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #10 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-06 13:56 --- Fixed. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNE

[Bug tree-optimization/43984] PRE misses full-redundancies, inserts into loops

2010-05-06 Thread matz at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-06 13:55 --- Subject: Bug 43984 Author: matz Date: Thu May 6 13:54:32 2010 New Revision: 159106 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=159106 Log: PR tree-optimization/43984 * tree-ssa-pre.c (inser

[Bug tree-optimization/43984] PRE misses full-redundancies, inserts into loops

2010-05-05 Thread steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-05 13:52 --- I think that's an oversight, then. You shouldn't have to use the delayed edge insert functions if you've pre-split all edges. Perhaps PRE can always use the _immediate insert functions, and save a walk over all edges

[Bug tree-optimization/43984] PRE misses full-redundancies, inserts into loops

2010-05-05 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de 2010-05-05 13:33 --- Subject: Re: PRE misses full-redundancies, inserts into loops On Wed, 5 May 2010, steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > --- Comment #5 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-05 13:10 > --- > I don't unde

[Bug tree-optimization/43984] PRE misses full-redundancies, inserts into loops

2010-05-05 Thread matz at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-05 13:32 --- PRE seems to have done this since forever. All edge inserts are delayed if the _immediate forms aren't used. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43984

[Bug tree-optimization/43984] PRE misses full-redundancies, inserts into loops

2010-05-05 Thread steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-05 13:10 --- I don't understand. We insert on edges now? Even though all critical edges are split? I thought that if you insert on a critical edge, the commit is instantanous, not delayed. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_

[Bug tree-optimization/43984] PRE misses full-redundancies, inserts into loops

2010-05-05 Thread matz at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-05 12:35 --- Ah, another case of a patch I held back for 4.6 to open, and then forgetting about it :-/ -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43984

[Bug tree-optimization/43984] PRE misses full-redundancies, inserts into loops

2010-05-05 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-05 12:20 --- Nope. It's because we eliminate() before committing edge inserts. Oops. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug tree-optimization/43984] PRE misses full-redundancies, inserts into loops

2010-05-05 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-05 11:13 --- Ah, it needs -fno-tree-dominator-opts. We are performing insertion in non-optimal order. We are inserting in BB11 | BB12 / \ BB44 BB45 and insert into BB45 before inserting into BB11, because walkin

[Bug tree-optimization/43984] PRE misses full-redundancies, inserts into loops

2010-05-04 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-04 17:22 --- I don't see any insert of iyz.data. But from the sound of it, this seems related to PR 38497. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43984