On Mon, 2018-10-22 at 15:56 +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
[...snip...]
> This is what I finally applied for the original patch after fixing
> the above issue.
>
> Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied.
>
> Richard.
>
> 2018-10-22 Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de>
>
> * gimple-ssa-evrp-analyze.c
> (evrp_range_analyzer::record_ranges_from_incoming_edge): Be
> smarter about what ranges to use.
> * tree-vrp.c (add_assert_info): Dump here.
> (register_edge_assert_for_2): Instead of here at multiple but
> not all places.
[...snip...]
> Index: gcc/tree-vrp.c
> ===================================================================
> --- gcc/tree-vrp.c (revision 265381)
> +++ gcc/tree-vrp.c (working copy)
> @@ -2299,6 +2299,9 @@ add_assert_info (vec<assert_info> &asser
> info.val = val;
> info.expr = expr;
> asserts.safe_push (info);
> + dump_printf (MSG_NOTE | MSG_PRIORITY_INTERNALS,
> + "Adding assert for %T from %T %s %T\n",
> + name, expr, op_symbol_code (comp_code), val);
> }
I think this dump_printf call needs to be wrapped in:
if (dump_enabled_p ())
since otherwise it does non-trivial work, which is then discarded for
the common case where dumping is disabled.
Alternatively, should dump_printf and dump_printf_loc test have an
early-reject internally for that?
> /* If NAME doesn't have an ASSERT_EXPR registered for asserting
> @@ -2698,16 +2701,6 @@ register_edge_assert_for_2 (tree name, e
> tmp = build1 (NOP_EXPR, TREE_TYPE (name), name3);
> if (cst2 != NULL_TREE)
> tmp = build2 (PLUS_EXPR, TREE_TYPE (name), tmp, cst2);
> -
> - if (dump_file)
> - {
> - fprintf (dump_file, "Adding assert for ");
> - print_generic_expr (dump_file, name3);
> - fprintf (dump_file, " from ");
> - print_generic_expr (dump_file, tmp);
> - fprintf (dump_file, "\n");
> - }
> -
> add_assert_info (asserts, name3, tmp, comp_code, val);
> }
[...snip...]
