Marek Polacek wrote:
>On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 06:44:40PM +0100, Zdenek Dvorak wrote:
>> > I was however worried that we might end up with an edge
>> > coming out of BB
>> > from different loop heading into the header. In this case setting
>up
>> > loop's latch as the source of the latch edge wou
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 06:44:40PM +0100, Zdenek Dvorak wrote:
> > I was however worried that we might end up with an edge
> > coming out of BB
> > from different loop heading into the header. In this case setting up
> > loop's latch as the source of the latch edge would be wrong.
>
> Actually, t
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 03:30:06PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> Marek Polacek wrote:
>
> >We ICEd on attached testcase because we didn't properly detected the
> >latch edge. Furthermore, I think the code for re-computing latches
> >is somehow broken at the moment. In fix_loop_structure we hav
Hi,
> > > We ICEd on attached testcase because we didn't properly detected the
> > > latch edge. Furthermore, I think the code for re-computing latches
> > > is somehow broken at the moment. In fix_loop_structure we have
> > > /* If there was no latch, schedule the loop for removal. */
>
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 05:26:02PM +0100, Zdenek Dvorak wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > We ICEd on attached testcase because we didn't properly detected the
> > latch edge. Furthermore, I think the code for re-computing latches
> > is somehow broken at the moment. In fix_loop_structure we have
> > /* I
Hi,
> We ICEd on attached testcase because we didn't properly detected the
> latch edge. Furthermore, I think the code for re-computing latches
> is somehow broken at the moment. In fix_loop_structure we have
> /* If there was no latch, schedule the loop for removal. */
> if (!first
Marek Polacek wrote:
>We ICEd on attached testcase because we didn't properly detected the
>latch edge. Furthermore, I think the code for re-computing latches
>is somehow broken at the moment. In fix_loop_structure we have
> /* If there was no latch, schedule the loop for removal. */
>
