This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] -ftree-loop-linear fixes (PR tree-optimization/46970) (take 2)
- From: Sebastian Pop <sebpop at gmail dot com>
- To: Richard Guenther <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, David Edelsohn <dje dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 10:54:51 -0600
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] -ftree-loop-linear fixes (PR tree-optimization/46970) (take 2)
- References: <20101217231141.GG2198@tyan-ft48-01.lab.bos.redhat.com> <AANLkTikcXwFf+oSuwfubFLtieu=Fg0cv49uZ3hgRqMcL@mail.gmail.com> <20101220222822.GB16156@tyan-ft48-01.lab.bos.redhat.com> <AANLkTimSYeJM3J1GnQFDnqopxrCaTnM-EgeME-ZixUOr@mail.gmail.com> <20110104124524.GH16156@tyan-ft48-01.lab.bos.redhat.com> <AANLkTi=MN4SLSC3RcVqYy3-mgzJ76QeycZ_T1J5PKDxU@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 10:22, Richard Guenther
<richard.guenther@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ugh. ?Sebastian - can we nuke tree-loop-linear compeltely and
> make -ftree-loop-linear an alias for -floop-interchange without
> regressions? ?I'd like to reduce the number of broken passes from
> 2 to 1 this way ...
I wouldn't mind removing tree-loop-linear, although other people
should also give their opinion on this matter: tree-loop-linear has no
external dependences whereas -floop-interchange depends on cloog and ppl.
Also we should get all the testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ltrans-*.c
passing with -floop-interchange. I will add all these testcases to
the graphite testsuite and see where we stand.
Sebastian