On 02/27/2018 04:18 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Feb 14, 2018, Jeff Law wrote:
>
>>> + regno = REGNO (inc_insn.reg0);
>>> + int luid = DF_INSN_LUID (mem_insn.insn);
>>> + mem_insn.insn = get_next_ref (regno, bb, reg_next_use);
>> So I think a com
On Feb 14, 2018, Jeff Law wrote:
>> + regno = REGNO (inc_insn.reg0);
>> + int luid = DF_INSN_LUID (mem_insn.insn);
>> + mem_insn.insn = get_next_ref (regno, bb, reg_next_use);
> So I think a comment is warranted right as we enter the TRUE arm.
On 01/23/2018 08:42 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> These two patches fix PR81611.
>
> The first one improves forwprop so that we avoid adding SSA conflicting
> by forwpropping the iv increment, which may cause both the incremented
> and the original value to be live, even when the iv is copied betwe
On Jan 25, 2018, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> Thanks, I'll retest with the simplified test (just in case; for I can't
> recall why I ended up with all those redundant conditions),
As suspected, removing the redundant tests didn't regress anything. I
suppose they mattered in some earlier experimenta
On Jan 24, 2018, Richard Biener wrote:
> given gimple_assign_ssa_name_copy checks it is an assign
*nod*
> the lhs != preinc check is always false given you got to phi via
> SSA_NAME_DEF_STMT of preinc.
*nod*
> The simple_iv_increment_p change is ok with that change.
Thanks, I'll retest with
On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 4:42 AM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> These two patches fix PR81611.
>
> The first one improves forwprop so that we avoid adding SSA conflicting
> by forwpropping the iv increment, which may cause both the incremented
> and the original value to be live, even when the iv is cop
