On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Richard Guenther > <richard.guent...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> (BTW: I think that the change to combine.c would be nice to have, to >>> find more other combine opportunities. I will propose the patch >>> separately.) >> >> Shouldn't there be a canonical order for parallels throughout the whole >> compiler? Maybe just enforced by gen_rtx_PARALLEL / RTL checking? >> At least as far as I understand "execution order" of insns inside a PARALLEL >> is undefined. > > All operations inside parallel happen "at the same time". And there is > no canonical order enforced, as sadly shown by the discrepancy between > combine and compare elimination passes.
Sure - all what I say is that the fix should be to enforce such canonical order instead of dealing with both. Richard. > Uros.
