On Tue, 2 May 2017, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Tue, May 02, 2017 at 01:16:05PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Sat, 29 Apr 2017, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 12:51:30PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > > > On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 12:46:44PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > > > > > >> Possibly, but for GCC 8. > > > > > > > > > > > > To both this switchconv patch and the potential improvement for > > > > > > loading > > > > > > from const arrays (can create an enhancement PR for that), or just > > > > > > the > > > > > > latter? > > > > > > > > > > Both I think - the patch is pretty big. > > > > > > > > Ok, I'll queue the patch for GCC8 then. > > > > > > If the tree-vrp.c change makes it in, is this patch ok for trunk too now > > > that we are in stage1? Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and > > > i686-linux on top of the tree-vrp.c change (without the tree-vrp.c change > > > vrp40.c regresses). > > > > Ok. > > So with XFAILing vrp40.c for now until the constant load opt is resolved?
Yes. Maybe instead add vrp40-2.c XFAILed and leave vrp40.c with switchconv disabled? Richard.
