This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [SVE] PR91532
- From: Prathamesh Kulkarni <prathamesh dot kulkarni at linaro dot org>
- To: Richard Biener <rguenther at suse dot de>
- Cc: Richard Sandiford <richard dot sandiford at arm dot com>, gcc Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 09:20:39 -0700
- Subject: Re: [SVE] PR91532
- References: <CAAgBjMmwn-kmhQTM8o2z=7hDtzO4g91GVs_PkHfLTFJ=2L3Rag@mail.gmail.com> <nycvar.YFH.7.76.1909191929480.5566@zhemvz.fhfr.qr>
On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 10:30, Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 19 Sep 2019, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> > For PR91532, the dead store is trivially deleted if we place dse pass
> > between ifcvt and vect. Would it be OK to add another instance of dse there ?
> > Or should we add an ad-hoc "basic-block dse" sub-pass to ifcvt that
> > will clean up the dead store ?
>
> No, the issue is the same as PR33315 and exists on the non-vectorized
> code as well.
Oh OK, thanks for pointing out.
Thanks,
Prathamesh
>
> Richard.