Re: [PATCH, SRA] Total scalarization and padding

Hi, On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 02:52:36PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Tue, 28 Jun 2011, Martin Jambor wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 03:01:17PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Martin Jambor wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > at the moment SRA can get

Re: [PATCH, SRA] Total scalarization and padding

On Tue, 28 Jun 2011, Martin Jambor wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 03:01:17PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Martin Jambor wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > at the moment SRA can get confused by alignment padding and think that > > > it actually contains

Re: [PATCH, SRA] Total scalarization and padding

Hi, On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 03:01:17PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Martin Jambor wrote: > > Hi, > > > > at the moment SRA can get confused by alignment padding and think that > > it actually contains some data for which there is no planned > > replacement and

Re: [PATCH, SRA] Total scalarization and padding

On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Martin Jambor wrote: > Hi, > > at the moment SRA can get confused by alignment padding and think that > it actually contains some data for which there is no planned > replacement and thus might leave some loads and stores in place > instead of removing them.  This

[PATCH, SRA] Total scalarization and padding

Hi, at the moment SRA can get confused by alignment padding and think that it actually contains some data for which there is no planned replacement and thus might leave some loads and stores in place instead of removing them. This is perhaps the biggest problem when we attempt total scalarization