[tree-ssa] Tail recursion improvement

Diego Novillo dnovillo@redhat.com
Fri Mar 5 14:43:00 GMT 2004


On Fri, 2004-03-05 at 08:10, Zdenek Dvorak wrote:

> Which is wrong, since the loads in the copied header now do not know
> that they are modified in the loop body.  It seems to me that we either
> need to preserve name tags in copied parts (which would be a good idea
> anyway, so that we do not lose information unnecessarily, but does not
> seem easy to do), or cancel the name tags that are rewritten out of ssa
> completely, right?
> 
Hmm, not really.  As soon as we lose name tags, we should transparently
switch to type tags.  The alias set of a type tag should be a super set
of the alias set of a name tag (a good check to add, btw), so they
should still be considered modified by the loop.

Give me a while to check it out in my tree.


Diego.



More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list