Hi,
Sunzir Deepur wrote:
>
> so why are those class 3 edges created at all ?
I didn't see any 3-edges blocks at all in your example.
These extra edges might come from a non-taken path that have been
removed after some further static-analysis of the code. Sorry, but I
didn't take a deeper look a
> * Since no one uses it, we rip out all support for the ffs pattern and
> expression.
There's an ffs builtin! How do we know who uses it?
Moreover, expmed uses it as an option in expanding some comparisons.
Pat Haugen wrote:
Is this being done on purpose (going on assumption that operands are
commutative), such as to allow more opportunities for a successful
allocation with reduced spill?
I think so, but reordering the "else if"s should improve the results.
I've also seen the same situation come
Richard Kenner wrote:
* Since no one uses it, we rip out all support for the ffs pattern and
expression.
There's an ffs builtin! How do we know who uses it?
I am not proposing to remove the built-in (i.e. the language visible
__builtin_ffs() function); only the RTL expression (ffs:MODE ...)
