On 5/6/07, Ira Rosen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yes, this should get vectorized. The problem is in data dependencies analysis. We fail to prove that s_5->a[i_16] and s_5->a[i_16] access the same memory location. I think, it happens since when we compare the bases of the data references (s_5->a and s_5->a) in base_object_differ_p(), we do that by comparing the trees (which are pointers) and not their content. I'll look into this and, I hope, I will submit a fix for that soon (I guess using operand_equal_p instead).
Duh, that function looks interesting, indeed ;) It should probably use get_base_address () to get at the base object and then operand_equal_p to compare them. Note that it strips outer variable offset as well, like for a[i].b[j] you will get 'a' as the base object. If data-ref cannot handle this well, just copy get_base_address () and stop at the first ARRAY_REF you come along. But maybe base_object_differ_p is only called from contexts that are well-defined in this regard. Richard.
