On Fri, 2005-04-08 at 13:41 -0400, Andrew MacLeod wrote: > On Fri, 2005-04-08 at 13:27, Andrew MacLeod wrote: > > On Fri, 2005-04-08 at 12:52, Jeffrey A Law wrote: > > > > actually, I'll jsut keep talking to myself here :-) > > > > In the interest of brevity, I'm just going to point out the > > > problematical store from the .ifcvt dump: > > > > > > > > > # x_16 = V_MAY_DEF <x_21>; > > > # SFT.3_20 = V_MAY_DEF <SFT.3_15>; > > > *D.1470_8 = D.1472_11; > > > > > > Which gets vectorized and appears like this in the .vect dump: > > > > > > > > > > > > # x_16 = V_MAY_DEF <x_21>; > > > # SFT.3_20 = V_MAY_DEF <SFT.3_15>; > > > *vect_px.17_36 = vect_var_.10_29; > > > What are these uses? If they are references to things that aliased > > *D.1470_8, we should eliminate the VUSE/MAYDEF, shouldnt we? I presume > > they arent relevant any more if vec_px.17 isnt in the same alias set. > > > > And if they are relevant, then we need to find out what the new variable > > is, and change all the uses to the new one > > > > you don't delete references to SFT.3_20, you rewrite any uses of > SFT.3_20 with the RHS of the MAY_DEF, so SFT.3_15... But that's only if the aliasing relationship is no longer relenvant. I don't think we've made that determination yet.
Jeff
