On 02/28/2016 02:11 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 9:48 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 3:59 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 11:50 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 02/25/2016 03:00 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
So I fail to see how only successor edges are relevant.
On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 9:48 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 3:59 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 11:50 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>>> On 02/25/2016 03:00 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
So I fail to see how only successor edges are relevant. Isn't the
importan
On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 3:59 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 11:50 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 02/25/2016 03:00 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> So I fail to see how only successor edges are relevant. Isn't the
>>> important
>>> case to catch whether we remove an edge marked EDGE
On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 11:50 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 02/25/2016 03:00 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>>
>> So I fail to see how only successor edges are relevant. Isn't the
>> important
>> case to catch whether we remove an edge marked EDGE_IRREDUCIBLE_LOOP?
>> Even if the BB persists we might ha
On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 8:50 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 02/25/2016 03:00 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>>
>> So I fail to see how only successor edges are relevant. Isn't the
>> important
>> case to catch whether we remove an edge marked EDGE_IRREDUCIBLE_LOOP?
>> Even if the BB persists we might hav
On 02/25/2016 03:00 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
So I fail to see how only successor edges are relevant. Isn't the important
case to catch whether we remove an edge marked EDGE_IRREDUCIBLE_LOOP?
Even if the BB persists we might have exposed a new loop here.
Note that it is not safe to look at {BB
On 02/25/2016 03:00 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
+ /* Look at BB's successors, if any are marked as BB_IRREDUCIBLE_LOOP,
then
+ removing BB (and its outgoing edges) may make the loop a natural
+ loop. In which case we need to schedule loop fixups. */
+ if (current_loops)
+for (edge_
On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 7:18 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
>
> PR69740 shows two instances where one or more transformations ultimately
> lead to the removal of a basic block.
>
> In both cases, removal of the basic block removes a path into an irreducible
> region and turns the irreducible region into a na
PR69740 shows two instances where one or more transformations ultimately
lead to the removal of a basic block.
In both cases, removal of the basic block removes a path into an
irreducible region and turns the irreducible region into a natural loop.
When that occurs we need to be requesting
