On Tue, 10 Oct 2023, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 11:59:28AM +, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > I don't see why the CONSTRUCTOR case couldn't be fine regardless of the
> > > vuse. Though, am not really sure when a CONSTRUCTOR would appear, the
> > > lhs would need to be an SSA_N
On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 11:59:28AM +, Richard Biener wrote:
> > I don't see why the CONSTRUCTOR case couldn't be fine regardless of the
> > vuse. Though, am not really sure when a CONSTRUCTOR would appear, the
> > lhs would need to be an SSA_NAME, so wouldn't for vectors that be a
> > VECTOR_C
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 10:49:04AM +, Richard Biener wrote:
> > The following fixes a mistake in count_nonzero_bytes which happily
> > skips over stores clobbering the memory we load a value we store
> > from and then performs analysis on the memory
On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 10:49:04AM +, Richard Biener wrote:
> The following fixes a mistake in count_nonzero_bytes which happily
> skips over stores clobbering the memory we load a value we store
> from and then performs analysis on the memory state before the
> intermediate store.
>
> The pat
The following fixes a mistake in count_nonzero_bytes which happily
skips over stores clobbering the memory we load a value we store
from and then performs analysis on the memory state before the
intermediate store.
The patch implements the most simple fix - guarantee that there are
no intervening
