[patch] Fix for automatic parallelization

[Sebastian Pop]

On Jan 10, 2008 5:11 AM, Zdenek Dvorak <rakdver@kam.mff.cuni.cz> wrote:
> > +  type = TREE_TYPE (nit);
> >    bsi = bsi_last (loop->latch);
> >    create_iv (build_int_cst_type (type, 0), build_int_cst (type, 1), NULL_TREE,
> >            loop, &bsi, true, &var_before, NULL);
>
> this fix looks weird, let me please have a look first what's going on
> there.
>

>From what I understood there is a type precision mismatch for the new
created iv.

> > @@ -1695,6 +1685,9 @@ gen_parallel_loop (struct loop *loop, ht
> >      create_call_for_reduction (loop, reduction_list, &clsn_data);
> >
> >    scev_reset ();
> > +  free_numbers_of_iterations_estimates_loop (parallel_head->loop_father);
> > +  if (loop_outer (parallel_head->loop_father))
> > +    free_numbers_of_iterations_estimates_loop (loop_outer (parallel_head->loop_father));
>
> you need to release the estimates for all loops, not just
> these two.
>

What about the following fix?

Index: tree-parloops.c
===================================================================
--- tree-parloops.c	(revision 131430)
+++ tree-parloops.c	(working copy)
@@ -1700,6 +1700,11 @@ gen_parallel_loop (struct loop *loop, ht
      expander to do it).  */
   cancel_loop_tree (loop);

+  /* Free loop bound estimations that could contain references to
+     removed statements.  */
+  FOR_EACH_LOOP (li, loop, 0)
+    free_numbers_of_iterations_estimates_loop (loop);
+
   /* Expand the parallel constructs.  We do it directly here instead of running
      a separate expand_omp pass, since it is more efficient, and less likely to
      cause troubles with further analyses not being able to deal with the