> Sent: 03 August 2011 14:48
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: fort...@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: [PATCH][RFC] Fix PR49957 - build array index differently
>
>
> This fixes PR49957 by keeping the array index into a multi-dimensional
> array in optimal associa
On Thursday 04 August 2011 13:12:04 Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Aug 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > On Wed, 3 Aug 2011, Mikael Morin wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > On Wednesday 03 August 2011 15:47:37 Richard Guenther wrote:
> > > > Comments? Any idea why reversing the loop would break
On Thu, 4 Aug 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Aug 2011, Mikael Morin wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > On Wednesday 03 August 2011 15:47:37 Richard Guenther wrote:
> > > Comments? Any idea why reversing the loop would break?
> >
> > Yes, the list of scalarized expressions has to be created
On Wed, 3 Aug 2011, Mikael Morin wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Wednesday 03 August 2011 15:47:37 Richard Guenther wrote:
> > Comments? Any idea why reversing the loop would break?
>
> Yes, the list of scalarized expressions has to be created in the same order
> it
> is consumed. Here the scalarized
Hello,
On Wednesday 03 August 2011 15:47:37 Richard Guenther wrote:
> Comments? Any idea why reversing the loop would break?
Yes, the list of scalarized expressions has to be created in the same order it
is consumed. Here the scalarized expressions are array indexes to be
precomputed out of th
Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, 3 Aug 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:
Bootstrap and regtest is currently running on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu,
the reversed loop one was ok (well, apart from those 2-3 fails).
Re-bootstrapping currently. The previous patch tested ok.
The patch looks OK. I don't k
On Wed, 3 Aug 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
> This fixes PR49957 by keeping the array index into a multi-dimensional
> array in optimal associated form which is ((off + outermost) + ...) +
> innermost) + constant) so that dependence analysis can properly
> handle it. It doesn't work right now
This fixes PR49957 by keeping the array index into a multi-dimensional
array in optimal associated form which is ((off + outermost) + ...) +
innermost) + constant) so that dependence analysis can properly
handle it. It doesn't work right now because we build the
expression in reverse order, fold
