https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77824
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77824
--- Comment #7 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Mon Oct 10 18:39:41 2016
New Revision: 240945
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=240945&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-10-10 Bill Schmidt
PR tree-optimization/77824
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77824
--- Comment #6 from Bill Schmidt ---
I've done some poking around, and I see copies showing up frequently in some of
GCC's own libraries, as well as in SPEC CPU2006 code. With a patched compiler
to key on SSA_NAME for copies, I've seen that many
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77824
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77824
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Eric, can you please provide a test case where you are seeing the
> unpropagated copies? Thanks!
I only have an Ada testcase but I think that it would be fairly easy to see
unpropagated copies: replace
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77824
--- Comment #3 from Bill Schmidt ---
Eric, can you please provide a test case where you are seeing the unpropagated
copies? Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77824
--- Comment #2 from Bill Schmidt ---
Ah, the passes have moved around some since I last looked at this. This used
to follow a dom pass, so the code for copies didn't kick in any more at that
point. So it's understandable that the copy propagati
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77824
--- Comment #1 from Bill Schmidt ---
Eric, thanks for the report! I'll have a look. Much obliged. This used to
work several years ago...
