This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Fix PR32540 exponential time behavior in PRE

From: "Richard Guenther" <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
To: "Sebastian Pop" <sebpop at gmail dot com>
Cc: "Daniel Berlin" <dberlin at dberlin dot org>, "GCC Patches" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "Nick Clifton" <nickc at redhat dot com>
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 12:12:16 +0100
Subject: Re: Fix PR32540 exponential time behavior in PRE
References: <cb9d34b20711031807m3444e3f5i9943640c6d36a857@mail.gmail.com> <84fc9c000711040253k5150a863p1da246bb9a618ba9@mail.gmail.com> <4aca3dc20711041133t3d12cca0p158078bc8159bac0@mail.gmail.com> <cb9d34b20711042220ne5dbab8g57fabd80a066e55@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/5/07, Sebastian Pop <sebpop@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 4, 2007 1:33 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin@dberlin.org> wrote:
> > 100 is fine as long as we are satisfied these are not problems with
> > value numbering deciding two values are different when they aren't.
>
> How can I test that there is no regression in the VN precision?

I think what Danny refers to is for this particular bug, if it is a bug in VN or
just an explosion in validly created VNs.  I am sure it is the latter, so the
concern is moot.

Which means, the patch is ok.

Thanks,
Richard.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Fix PR32540 exponential time behavior in PRE
  - From: Daniel Berlin

References:
- Fix PR32540 exponential time behavior in PRE
  - From: Sebastian Pop
- Re: Fix PR32540 exponential time behavior in PRE
  - From: Richard Guenther
- Re: Fix PR32540 exponential time behavior in PRE
  - From: Daniel Berlin
- Re: Fix PR32540 exponential time behavior in PRE
  - From: Sebastian Pop

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]