On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 5:13 AM Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
> On Nov 29, 2023, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> >> Because &arg_#(D)[n_#] is good gimple, but &(*byref_arg_#(D))[n_#] isn't.
>
> > 'arg_#(D)' looks like a SSA name, and no, taking the address doesn't work,
> > so I assume it was &MEM[arg_(D)][
On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 6:04 AM Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
> On Nov 29, 2023, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 9:53 AM Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
> >> Because &arg_#(D)[n_#] is good gimple, but &(*byref_arg_#(D))[n_#] isn't.
>
> > 'arg_#(D)' looks like a SSA name, and no, taking t
On Nov 29, 2023, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 9:53 AM Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> Because &arg_#(D)[n_#] is good gimple, but &(*byref_arg_#(D))[n_#] isn't.
> 'arg_#(D)' looks like a SSA name, and no, taking the address doesn't work,
> so I assume it was &MEM[arg_(D)][n_#] whic
On Nov 29, 2023, Richard Biener wrote:
>> Because &arg_#(D)[n_#] is good gimple, but &(*byref_arg_#(D))[n_#] isn't.
> 'arg_#(D)' looks like a SSA name, and no, taking the address doesn't work,
> so I assume it was &MEM[arg_(D)][n_#] which is indeed OK.
Yeah.
> But you shouldn't need to change
On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 9:53 AM Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
> On Nov 23, 2023, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > Conceptually it shouldn't be much different from what IPA-SRA does
> > which is cloning a function but with different arguments, the function
> > signature transform described in terms of ipa-p
On Nov 23, 2023, Richard Biener wrote:
> Conceptually it shouldn't be much different from what IPA-SRA does
> which is cloning a function but with different arguments, the function
> signature transform described in terms of ipa-param-manipulation bits.
> I've talked with Martin and at least ther
On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 11:56 AM Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
> Hello, Richi,
>
> Thanks for the extensive review!
>
> On Nov 22, 2023, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 1:40 PM Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> >>
> >> On Oct 26, 2023, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> >>
> >> >> This is a refresh
Hello, Richi,
Thanks for the extensive review!
On Nov 22, 2023, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 1:40 PM Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>>
>> On Oct 26, 2023, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>>
>> >> This is a refreshed and improved version of the version posted back in
>> >> June. https://g
On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 1:40 PM Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
> On Oct 26, 2023, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
> >> This is a refreshed and improved version of the version posted back in
> >> June. https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-June/621936.html
>
> > Ping? https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gc
On Oct 26, 2023, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> This is a refreshed and improved version of the version posted back in
>> June. https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-June/621936.html
> Ping? https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-October/633675.html
> I'm combining the gcc/ipa-strub
Ping? https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-October/633675.html
I'm combining the gcc/ipa-strub.cc bits from
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-October/633526.html
--
Alexandre Oliva, happy hackerhttps://FSFLA.org/blogs/lxo/
Free Software Activist
11 matches
Mail list logo
