Strange IV choices?

[Giovanni Bajo]

Sebastian Pop <sebastian.pop@cri.ensmp.fr> wrote:

> In the second case the analyzer produces a scev_not_known element:
>
> (analyze_scalar_evolution
>   (loop_nb = 1)
>   (scalar = ostride_192)
> (get_scalar_evolution
>   (scalar = ostride_192)
>   (scalar_evolution = ))
> (analyze_initial_condition
>   (loop_phi_node =
> ostride_192 = PHI <ostride_362(11), ostride_125(16)>;)
>   (init_cond = ostride_125))
> (analyze_evolution_in_loop
>   (loop_phi_node = ostride_192 = PHI <ostride_362(11), ostride_125(16)>;)
>   (evolution_function = scev_not_known))
> (set_scalar_evolution
>   (scalar = ostride_192)
>   (scalar_evolution = ostride_192))
> )
>
> This situation is generated by the following code:
>
> # ostrideD.165952_5 = PHI <1(0)>;
> D.166161_150 = (*dD.166162_151)[1];
> ostrideD.165952_125 = ostrideD.165952_5 * D.166161_150;
> loop
>   # ostrideD.165952_192 = PHI <ostrideD.165952_362(11),
>   ostrideD.165952_125(16)>; D.166161_358 = (*dD.166162_356)[1];
>   ostrideD.165952_362 = ostrideD.165952_192 * D.166161_358;
> endloop

Then, why does it recognize the evolution of the first testcase? They should
be identical.
-- 
Giovanni Bajo