On 10/31/2011 09:19 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
> On 10/30/2011 10:54 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
>>> On 10/30/2011 09:20 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
Richard,
I have a fix for PR50878.
>>>
>>> Sorry, with patch this time.
>>
>> Ok for
On 11/01/2011 10:43 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 9:19 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
>> On 10/30/2011 10:54 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
>>> On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Tom de Vries
>>> wrote:
On 10/30/2011 09:20 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
> Richard,
>
> I hav
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 9:19 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
> On 10/30/2011 10:54 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
>>> On 10/30/2011 09:20 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
Richard,
I have a fix for PR50878.
>>>
>>> Sorry, with patch this time.
>>
On 10/30/2011 10:54 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
>> On 10/30/2011 09:20 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
>>> Richard,
>>>
>>> I have a fix for PR50878.
>>
>> Sorry, with patch this time.
>
> Ok for now, but see Davids mail and the complexity issue with
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
> On 10/30/2011 09:20 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
>> Richard,
>>
>> I have a fix for PR50878.
>
> Sorry, with patch this time.
Ok for now, but see Davids mail and the complexity issue with iteratively
updating dominators. It seems to me that we kn
On 10/30/2011 09:20 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
> Richard,
>
> I have a fix for PR50878.
Sorry, with patch this time.
Thanks,
- Tom
>
> A simplified form of the problem from the test-case of the PR is shown in this
> cfg. Block 12 has as direct dominator block 5.
>
> 5
>/ \
>
