Re: [PATCH PR64705]Don't aggressively expand induction variable's base

2015-02-12 Thread Richard Biener
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote: > On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 7:24 PM, Richard Biener > wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 9:23 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote: >>> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 12:24 AM, Richard Biener >>> wrote: >>> >>> Previously, the computation of _1174 can be replaced by _629

Re: [PATCH PR64705]Don't aggressively expand induction variable's base

2015-02-11 Thread Bin.Cheng
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 7:24 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 9:23 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 12:24 AM, Richard Biener >> wrote: >> >> Previously, the computation of _1174 can be replaced by _629 in bb8 in >> DOM2 pass, while it can't after patching. This

Re: [PATCH PR64705]Don't aggressively expand induction variable's base

2015-02-11 Thread Richard Biener
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 9:23 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote: > On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 12:24 AM, Richard Biener > wrote: >> On February 9, 2015 11:09:49 AM CET, Bin Cheng wrote: >> >> Did you extract a testcase for it? Note that the IV step itself may be >> expanded >> Too much. >> >> I >>>looked into

Re: [PATCH PR64705]Don't aggressively expand induction variable's base

2015-02-11 Thread Bin.Cheng
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 12:24 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On February 9, 2015 11:09:49 AM CET, Bin Cheng wrote: > > Did you extract a testcase for it? Note that the IV step itself may be > expanded > Too much. > > I >>looked into the regression and thought it was because of passes after >>IVO

Re: [PATCH PR64705]Don't aggressively expand induction variable's base

2015-02-10 Thread Bin.Cheng
d... > >> >> Ok with that change. >> >> Thanks, >> Richard. >> >>>> -Original Message- >>>> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches- >>>> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Bin

Re: [PATCH PR64705]Don't aggressively expand induction variable's base

2015-02-10 Thread Bin.Cheng
h that change. > > Thanks, > Richard. > >>> -Original Message- >>> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches- >>> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Bin Cheng >>> Sent: Monday, February 09, 2015 6:10 PM >>> To: gcc-patches@

Re: [PATCH PR64705]Don't aggressively expand induction variable's base

2015-02-10 Thread Richard Biener
t;> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Bin Cheng >> Sent: Monday, February 09, 2015 6:10 PM >> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org >> Subject: [PATCH PR64705]Don't aggressively expand induction variable's > base >> >> Hi, >> As comments in the PR, root

Re: [PATCH PR64705]Don't aggressively expand induction variable's base

2015-02-09 Thread Richard Biener
On February 9, 2015 11:09:49 AM CET, Bin Cheng wrote: >Hi, >As comments in the PR, root cause is GCC aggressively expand induction >variable's base. This patch avoids that by adding new parameter to >expand_simple_operations thus we can stop expansion whenever ssa var >referred by IV's step is en

RE: [PATCH PR64705]Don't aggressively expand induction variable's base

2015-02-09 Thread Bin Cheng
t; Subject: [PATCH PR64705]Don't aggressively expand induction variable's base > > Hi, > As comments in the PR, root cause is GCC aggressively expand induction > variable's base. This patch avoids that by adding new parameter to > expand_simple_operations thus we can st

[PATCH PR64705]Don't aggressively expand induction variable's base

2015-02-09 Thread Bin Cheng
Hi, As comments in the PR, root cause is GCC aggressively expand induction variable's base. This patch avoids that by adding new parameter to expand_simple_operations thus we can stop expansion whenever ssa var referred by IV's step is encountered. As comments in patch, we could stop expanding at