This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: if-conv problem....
- From: "Deepak B. Nayak" <deepakbn at csa dot iisc dot ernet dot in>
- To: Jim Wilson <wilson at redhat dot com>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 10:18:44 +0530 (IST)
- Subject: Re: if-conv problem....
On 2 Oct 2002, Jim Wilson wrote:
> That isn't a complete bug report. You didn't mention what target you
> configured gcc for. You didn't mention what compiler options you used.
> You didn't mention which if-conv pass you are looking at. There are two of
sorry for this..this will not be repeated...
target is ia64-linux options we tried using are all -O,-O2,-O3
> Also, a testcase that is easy to compile is most useful. The testcase you
> included has to be edited before it can be compiled, because it includes
> line numbers. It is easy to fix, but it is an unnecessary annoyance.
again sorry for this
> I can't reproduce your problem with current gcc sources configured for an
> ia64-linux target using -O0, -O1, or -O2. I'd guess the problem is that
> the testcase is bogus. Both a and c are uninitialized, and c is dead at
> the end of the function. Try changing the function name to "sub", making
> a and c function parameters, and adding a statement to return c at the end
> of the function.
i did change the test case and the first if-conv pass did not if-convert
but second if-conv pass did the if-conversion
we wanted if-conv to be done before instr-combine pass so we need first
if-conv pass to work..but what is diff..???
why first pass did not work and second one did..???
testcase is as fallows...
int sub(int a,int c)
if(c == a)