Re: [PATCH] ICF is more strict about non-common function and var, attributes.

2015-03-01 Thread Jan Hubicka
> > >and thus we will hapilly merge types with different TYPE_ALIGN. > > >Should func_checker::types_compatible be extended to compare these? > > >Clearly TYPE_ALIGN matters for vectorizer and other plaes... > > > > But it matters on MEM_REFs only, and you can't use canonical types for that. > >

Re: [PATCH] ICF is more strict about non-common function and var, attributes.

2015-03-01 Thread Jan Hubicka
> >and thus we will hapilly merge types with different TYPE_ALIGN. > >Should func_checker::types_compatible be extended to compare these? > >Clearly TYPE_ALIGN matters for vectorizer and other plaes... > > But it matters on MEM_REFs only, and you can't use canonical types for that. > And we don't

Re: [PATCH] ICF is more strict about non-common function and var, attributes.

2015-03-01 Thread Richard Biener
On March 1, 2015 1:09:50 AM CET, Jan Hubicka wrote: >> > >> > Half of FAILs are gone, but the rest is correctly merged (alignment >matches). Thus I would omit ICF >> > in this testcase. I'm going to install the patch. > >Richard, I wonder what happens with TYPE_ALIGN at LTO. It is not part >of c

Re: [PATCH] ICF is more strict about non-common function and var, attributes.

2015-02-28 Thread Jan Hubicka
> > > > Half of FAILs are gone, but the rest is correctly merged (alignment > > matches). Thus I would omit ICF > > in this testcase. I'm going to install the patch. Richard, I wonder what happens with TYPE_ALIGN at LTO. It is not part of canonical type definition and thus we get random alignm

Re: [PATCH] ICF is more strict about non-common function and var, attributes.

2015-02-28 Thread Jan Hubicka
> > Half of FAILs are gone, but the rest is correctly merged (alignment matches). > Thus I would omit ICF > in this testcase. I'm going to install the patch. > > Thanks, > Martin > >From 60c5fdc5d5bab2d26a43813ffebda247c8dd1fce Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: mliska > Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 2

Re: [PATCH] ICF is more strict about non-common function and var, attributes.

2015-02-28 Thread Martin Liška
On 02/28/2015 11:42 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote: >> >> 2015-02-28 Martin Liska >> Jan Hubicka >> >> * ipa-icf-gimple.c (func_checker::compare_variable_decl): >> Validate variable alignment. >> * ipa-icf.c (sem_function::equals_private): Be more precise >> about non-comm

Re: [PATCH] ICF is more strict about non-common function and var, attributes.

2015-02-28 Thread Jan Hubicka
> > 2015-02-28 Martin Liska > Jan Hubicka > > * ipa-icf-gimple.c (func_checker::compare_variable_decl): > Validate variable alignment. > * ipa-icf.c (sem_function::equals_private): Be more precise > about non-common function attributes. > (sem_variabl

[PATCH] ICF is more strict about non-common function and var, attributes.

2015-02-28 Thread Martin Liška
Hello. Following patch is guard for special non-common function attributes that can be spotted by ICF machinery. Tested on x86_64-linux. Ready for trunk? Thanks, Martin >From 13e8c55b6317bf4e2c21ef04305cb3a20ad51255 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: mliska Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 21:49:46 +0100 Sub