Hi Richard, Sorry for my misunderstanding. I am calling the df_analyze() instead of df_analyze1() at the end. Shouldn't df_analyze take care and compute the correct postorder (df-core.cc:1273) ?
Thank you, Claudiu On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 1:06 PM Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 11:37 AM Claudiu Zissulescu Ianculescu > <claz...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I have update the fix to this one: > > > > diff --git a/gcc/df-core.cc b/gcc/df-core.cc > > index a901b84878f..cc6383990a1 100644 > > --- a/gcc/df-core.cc > > +++ b/gcc/df-core.cc > > @@ -1437,7 +1437,16 @@ df_analyze_loop (class loop *loop) > > df_set_blocks (blocks); > > BITMAP_FREE (blocks); > > > > - df_analyze_1 (); > > + /* Iterate over loop's exit edges and add theirs destinations BB > > + indexes. */ > > + struct loop_exit *exit; > > + for (exit = loop->exits->next; exit->e; exit = exit->next) > > + bitmap_set_bit (df->blocks_to_analyze, exit->e->dest->index); > > I think you want to adjust the local 'blocks' bitmap passed to df_set_blocks. > There's also the issue that the computed postorder doesn't include the new > blocks and thus the computation will likely be invalid? > > > + > > + if (dump_file) > > + debug_bitmap_file (dump_file, df->blocks_to_analyze); > > + > > + df_analyze (); > > } > > > > I still need to validate it for x86 > > > > Best, > > Claudiu > > > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 7:38 PM Claudiu Zissulescu Ianculescu > > <claz...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe you want to iterate over the loops exit edges and include their > > > > destination block instead? > > > > > > > > > > This is better approach, let me try it and I will be back to you. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Claudiu
