This is the mail archive of the gcc@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: Loop optimizer issues

From: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
To: Zdenek Dvorak <rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz>
Cc: Pop Sébastian <pop at gauvain dot u-strasbg dot fr>, Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>, Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>
Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2003 12:08:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Loop optimizer issues
References: <20030530183552.GA27110@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz><1054585449.9789.146.camel@frodo.toronto.redhat.com><20030603075956.GB11555@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz><20030603083835.GB23604@gauvain.u-strasbg.fr><20030603084726.GA17851@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>

On Tue, 3 Jun 2003 10:47:26 +0200, Zdenek Dvorak <rakdver@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> wrote:

>> The fold function can be used for simplifying these expressions.
>> 
>> However as Zack has pointed out in his paper there are 4 fold functions: 
>> 3 at rtl level, and one fold at tree level.  
>
> and one more of mine that I have added due to iv analysis :-( I
> just cannot cope with other rtl simplifiers that hapily "simplify"
> 2*3*4*x to (((x << 2) * 3) << 1).

Yep, I have similar issues with the tree folder.

Jason

References:
- Re: Loop optimizer issues
  - From: Diego Novillo
- Re: Loop optimizer issues
  - From: Zdenek Dvorak
- Re: Loop optimizer issues
  - From: Pop Sébastian
- Re: Loop optimizer issues
  - From: Zdenek Dvorak

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