This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH]: Fix PR tree-optimization/19038
- From: Jeffrey A Law <law at redhat dot com>
- To: Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, dnovillo at redhat dot com
- Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 13:27:41 -0700
- Subject: Re: [PATCH]: Fix PR tree-optimization/19038
- Organization: Red Hat, Inc
- References: <1106337261.9807.12.camel@IBM-82ZWS052TEN>
- Reply-to: law at redhat dot com
On Fri, 2005-01-21 at 14:54 -0500, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> The reason the two names in this testcase can't coalesce (which blocks
> us from creating a single loop bb) is because we replace a loop
> invariant name with a loop variant one.
> Andrew Pinski says:
> <pinskia> DannyB: all the loops in thin6d.f looks so much better now,
> In general, replacing invariant things with variant ones is a bad idea,
> and can only increase register pressure, besides the affect it had on
> This patch stops DOM from performing this copy propagation.
> An earlier patch had stopped DOM from doing this during expression
> replacement, so hopefully this isn't controversial.
> Bootstrapped and regtested on i686-pc-linux-gnu.
> Okay for mainline?
This is fine.