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: Bug in CFG or CD-DCE?

From: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>
To: Steven Bosscher <stevenb at suse dot de>
Cc: "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 07:02:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Bug in CFG or CD-DCE?
Organization: Red Hat Canada
References: <1089676479.3222.157.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200407130946.40456.stevenb@suse.de> <1089716002.3222.176.camel@localhost.localdomain>

On Tue, 2004-07-13 at 06:53, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-07-13 at 03:46, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> 
> > Whether there's a FALLTHRU edge or not is irrelevant.  Block L22
> > is not control dependent on block L41, itt is control dependent on
> > block L26.
> >
> Exactly.  Though, I did try clearing/recomputing PDOM info.  That's
> where the bug may be, ultimately.
> 
Wait.  I don't think that's right.  This code is testing CD with PDOM. 
In this case, block L22 *does* post-dominate block L41.


Diego.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Bug in CFG or CD-DCE?
  - From: Devang Patel

References:
- Bug in CFG or CD-DCE?
  - From: Diego Novillo
- Re: Bug in CFG or CD-DCE?
  - From: Steven Bosscher
- Re: Bug in CFG or CD-DCE?
  - From: Diego Novillo

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