On Fri, 2 Jul 2021, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Jul 2021, Michael Matz wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > On Thu, 1 Jul 2021, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > > diff --git a/gcc/gimple-loop-interchange.cc
> > > b/gcc/gimple-loop-interchange.cc
> > > index 43045c5455e..43ef112a2d0 100644
> > > ---
On Thu, 1 Jul 2021, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, 1 Jul 2021, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > diff --git a/gcc/gimple-loop-interchange.cc b/gcc/gimple-loop-interchange.cc
> > index 43045c5455e..43ef112a2d0 100644
> > --- a/gcc/gimple-loop-interchange.cc
> > +++ b/gcc/gimple-loop-interchan
Hello,
On Thu, 1 Jul 2021, Richard Biener wrote:
> diff --git a/gcc/gimple-loop-interchange.cc b/gcc/gimple-loop-interchange.cc
> index 43045c5455e..43ef112a2d0 100644
> --- a/gcc/gimple-loop-interchange.cc
> +++ b/gcc/gimple-loop-interchange.cc
> @@ -1043,8 +1043,11 @@ tree_loop_interchange::val
The following revises the original fix for PR101173 to correctly
check for a reversed dependence rather than disallowing a zero
distance. It also adds a check from TSVC which asks for this
kind of interchange (but with a valid dependence).
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, push
