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 hoisting fails

From: "Paulo J. Matos" <pocmatos at gmail dot com>
To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 07:43:36 +0000
Subject: Re: loop hoisting fails
References: <iiu0pq$ioe$1@dough.gmane.org> <mcrd3n1p7pi.fsf@google.com> <iiubpk$ie4$1@dough.gmane.org> <mcrzkq5nqtl.fsf@google.com> <ij0uq1$jj6$1@dough.gmane.org> <mcrvd0rj2pi.fsf@google.com>

On 10/02/11 16:04, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:

Bother.  I've encountered that problem before and I think I used a
sledgehammer (a local patch).  It's definitely a bug that gcse doesn't
consider costs.

I think I might try also patching my local gcc. I guess the trick is to check for the cost of the alternative before making the replacement in gcse, right? Is it possible to have an idea of how you did it?

Follow-Ups:
- Re: loop hoisting fails
  - From: Ian Lance Taylor

References:
- loop hoisting fails
  - From: Paulo J. Matos
- Re: loop hoisting fails
  - From: Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: loop hoisting fails
  - From: Paulo J. Matos
- Re: loop hoisting fails
  - From: Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: loop hoisting fails
  - From: Paulo J. Matos
- Re: loop hoisting fails
  - From: Ian Lance Taylor

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