[patch] [4.2 projects] vectorize type conversions - 2/6

[Dorit Nuzman]

Diego Novillo <dnovillo@redhat.com> wrote on 17/08/2006 08:47:48 PM:

>
> > !       copy_virtual_operands (new_stmt, stmt);
> > !       if (j == 0)
> > !    {
> > !      /* The original store is deleted so the same SSA_NAMEs can be
used.
> > !       */
> > !      FOR_EACH_SSA_TREE_OPERAND (def, stmt, iter, SSA_OP_VMAYDEF)
> > !        {
> > !          SSA_NAME_DEF_STMT (def) = new_stmt;
> > !          mark_sym_for_renaming (SSA_NAME_VAR (def));
> > !        }
> > !
> > !      STMT_VINFO_VEC_STMT (stmt_info) = *vec_stmt =  new_stmt;
> > !    }
> > !       else
> > !    {
> > !      /* Create new names for all the definitions created by COPY and
> > !         add replacement mappings for each new name.  */
> > !           FOR_EACH_SSA_DEF_OPERAND (def_p, new_stmt, iter,
> SSA_OP_VMAYDEF)
> > !        {
> > !          create_new_def_for (DEF_FROM_PTR (def_p), new_stmt, def_p);
> > !          mark_sym_for_renaming (SSA_NAME_VAR (DEF_FROM_PTR (def_p)));
> > !        }
> >
> But you are not adding replacement mappings here, you are giving up
> and marking the symbols for renaming.  Shortcoming of the way we
> update SSA or simplicity?
>

not sure, I'll check.

> For now this is fine, but I'd like to see before/after snippets.  If
> it's a shortcoming in the way we update the SSA form, I'd like to
> address that in the mem-ssa branch.
>
>
> OK with the above changes.
>
> :REVIEWMAIL:

thanks,

dorit