This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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: Why does loop-35.c store motion testcase fail for AVR?


Thanks for explanation.

Do you think I should report this as BUG/missed optimsation? and XFAIL test for AVR?

or somehow make test target size dependent (I guess pointer size != long)


Andy






----------------------------------------------
Sent from my Dingleberry wired device.


-----Original Message----- From: Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com> To: Andy H <hutchinsonandy@aim.com> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Sent: Tue, 17 Jun 2008 8:33 am Subject: Re: Why does loop-35.c store motion testcase fail for AVR?



On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 9:29 PM, Andy H <hutchinsonandy@aim.com> wrote:
Help !

gcc.dg/tree-ssa/loop-35.c is a test that looks for "Executing store
motion"
in dump-tree-lim-details

As the load and store of memory location should be pulled out of loop.


This works for 3 out of 4 tescases. But on AVR target test3() will
fail.

The only difference between this and test1() is that index is
unsigned long
rather than int.
Index of char or int work fine.

Why????

Even considering pointers and int are only HImode, I cant see why a
long
(SImode) should affect this.

This is because the alias-oracle for store-motion doesn't handle conversions
to sizetype well in the offset disambiguation.


Richard.



void test3(unsigned long b)
{
 unsigned i;

 /* And here.  */
 for (i = 0; i < 100; i++)
  {
    arr[b+8].X += i;
    arr[b+9].X += i;
  }
}





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