On April 9, 2016 6:07:19 AM GMT+02:00, Sebastian Pop <seb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:03 AM, Tom de Vries <tom_devr...@mentor.com>
>wrote:
>> pdr_0 (read
>> in gimple stmt: _9 = yu[_8][0];
>> data accesses: { S_4[i1, i2] -> [1, 0, 1 + i1] }
>
>data access should be { S_4[i1, i2] -> [1, 1 + i1, 0] }
>
>> subscript sizes: { [1, i1, 0] : i1 >= 0 and i1 <= 3 }
>> )
>[...]
>> I'm not really sure how this is supposed to be fixed. I imagine that
>we should do one of 3:
>> 1. we change the order in the access functions
>> 2. we change the order in the subscript_sizes
>> 3. we keep the orders as they are, but don't intersect them directly
>> but do an order inversion before.
>>
>> I've picked 1, since that was the easiest for me to implement (but
>I'm not sure if by doing so, I've broken any hardcoded graphite
>assumptions).
>
>1 is the right fix: both access functions and subscript sizes should
>be in the same order.
>If Richi agrees, ok to commit.
OK.
Richard.
>Thanks,
>Sebastian
