On Tue, 14 Sep 2021, Xionghu Luo wrote:
>
>
> On 2021/9/13 16:17, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
[...]
> > I don't understand - BB6 is the header block of loop 2 which is
> > always entered and thus BB6 is always executed at least once.
> >
> > The important part is that BB4 which follows the inner
On 2021/9/13 16:17, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, 13 Sep 2021, Xionghu Luo wrote:
On 2021/9/10 21:54, Xionghu Luo via Gcc-patches wrote:
On 2021/9/9 18:55, Richard Biener wrote:
diff --git a/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.c b/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.c
index 5d6845478e7..4b187c2cdaf 100644
--- a/gcc
On Mon, 13 Sep 2021, Xionghu Luo wrote:
>
>
> On 2021/9/10 21:54, Xionghu Luo via Gcc-patches wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 2021/9/9 18:55, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> diff --git a/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.c b/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.c
> >> index 5d6845478e7..4b187c2cdaf 100644
> >> --- a/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im
On Fri, 10 Sep 2021, Xionghu Luo wrote:
>
>
> On 2021/9/9 18:55, Richard Biener wrote:
> > diff --git a/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.c b/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.c
> > index 5d6845478e7..4b187c2cdaf 100644
> > --- a/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.c
> > +++ b/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.c
> > @@ -3074,15 +3074,13 @@ fill_alw
On 2021/9/10 21:54, Xionghu Luo via Gcc-patches wrote:
On 2021/9/9 18:55, Richard Biener wrote:
diff --git a/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.c b/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.c
index 5d6845478e7..4b187c2cdaf 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.c
+++ b/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.c
@@ -3074,15 +3074,13 @@ fill_always_ex
On 2021/9/9 18:55, Richard Biener wrote:
diff --git a/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.c b/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.c
index 5d6845478e7..4b187c2cdaf 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.c
+++ b/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.c
@@ -3074,15 +3074,13 @@ fill_always_executed_in_1 (class loop *loop, sbitmap
contains_call)
On Thu, 9 Sep 2021, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Sep 2021, Xionghu Luo wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On 2021/9/2 18:37, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2 Sep 2021, Xionghu Luo wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 2021/9/2 16:50, Richard Biener wrote:
> > >>> On Thu, 2 Sep 2021, Richard Biener
On Thu, 9 Sep 2021, Xionghu Luo wrote:
>
>
> On 2021/9/2 18:37, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Thu, 2 Sep 2021, Xionghu Luo wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2021/9/2 16:50, Richard Biener wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 2 Sep 2021, Richard Biener wrote:
> >>>
> On Thu, 2 Sep 2021, Xionghu Luo wrote:
>
On 2021/9/2 18:37, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, 2 Sep 2021, Xionghu Luo wrote:
On 2021/9/2 16:50, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, 2 Sep 2021, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, 2 Sep 2021, Xionghu Luo wrote:
On 2021/9/1 17:58, Richard Biener wrote:
This fixes the CFG walk order of fill_a
On Thu, 2 Sep 2021, Xionghu Luo wrote:
>
>
> On 2021/9/2 16:50, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Thu, 2 Sep 2021, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 2 Sep 2021, Xionghu Luo wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 2021/9/1 17:58, Richard Biener wrote:
> This fixes the CFG walk order of fill_always
On 2021/9/2 16:50, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Sep 2021, Richard Biener wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 2 Sep 2021, Xionghu Luo wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2021/9/1 17:58, Richard Biener wrote:
This fixes the CFG walk order of fill_always_executed_in to use
RPO oder rather than the dominator b
On Thu, 2 Sep 2021, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Sep 2021, Xionghu Luo wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On 2021/9/1 17:58, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > This fixes the CFG walk order of fill_always_executed_in to use
> > > RPO oder rather than the dominator based order computed by
> > > get_loop_body_in
On Thu, 2 Sep 2021, Xionghu Luo wrote:
>
>
> On 2021/9/1 17:58, Richard Biener wrote:
> > This fixes the CFG walk order of fill_always_executed_in to use
> > RPO oder rather than the dominator based order computed by
> > get_loop_body_in_dom_order. That fixes correctness issues with
> > unorder
On 2021/9/1 17:58, Richard Biener wrote:
This fixes the CFG walk order of fill_always_executed_in to use
RPO oder rather than the dominator based order computed by
get_loop_body_in_dom_order. That fixes correctness issues with
unordered dominator children.
The RPO order computed by rev_post_
This fixes the CFG walk order of fill_always_executed_in to use
RPO oder rather than the dominator based order computed by
get_loop_body_in_dom_order. That fixes correctness issues with
unordered dominator children.
The RPO order computed by rev_post_order_and_mark_dfs_back_seme in
its for-iterat
15 matches
Mail list logo