Recovering REG_EXPR information after temporary expression replacement

2012-01-27 Thread William J. Schmidt
A member of our team was working on some switch statement optimizations, and ran into a situation that seems a little curious on the face of it. Consider these two test variants: int test_switch_1 (unsigned int *index, int i)

Re: Recovering REG_EXPR information after temporary expression replacement

2012-01-27 Thread William J. Schmidt
Great, thanks! Results are good on this specific test case. Seems like a nice thing to add in 4.8. On Fri, 2012-01-27 at 18:40 +0100, Michael Matz wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, 27 Jan 2012, William J. Schm

Re: A question about redundant PHI expression stmt

2012-02-27 Thread William J. Schmidt
On Fri, 2012-02-24 at 16:07 +0800, Jiangning Liu wrote: > Hi, > > For the small case below, there are some redundant PHI expression stmt > generated, and finally cause back-end generates redundant copy instructions > due to some reasons around IRA. > > int *l, *r, *g; > void test_func(int n) > {

Re: A question about redundant PHI expression stmt

2012-02-28 Thread William J. Schmidt
On Tue, 2012-02-28 at 11:21 +0100, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Jiangning Liu wrote: > > > > > >> -Original Message- > >> From: Jiangning Liu > >> Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 4:07 PM > >> To: Jiangning

Re: A question about redundant PHI expression stmt

2012-02-28 Thread William J. Schmidt
On Tue, 2012-02-28 at 11:03 -0600, William J. Schmidt wrote: > I think this is probably a problem with how cprop_into_successor_phis > works. It only propagates into immediate successors of a block. In > this case copies are propagated from bb12 into phis in bb13 and bb14 (of > whi

Re: A question about redundant PHI expression stmt

2012-02-28 Thread William J. Schmidt
On Tue, 2012-02-28 at 11:52 -0600, William J. Schmidt wrote: > On Tue, 2012-02-28 at 11:03 -0600, William J. Schmidt wrote: > > > I think this is probably a problem with how cprop_into_successor_phis > > works. It only propagates into immediate successors of a block. In &g

Question about bitsizetype

2012-05-09 Thread William J. Schmidt
Greetings, I've been debugging a Fedora 17 build problem on ppc64-redhat-linux, and ran into an issue with bitsizetype. I have a patch that fixes the problem, but I'm not yet convinced it's the right fix. I'm hoping someone here can help me sort it out. The problem occurs when compiling some Ja

Re: Question about bitsizetype

2012-05-09 Thread William J. Schmidt
On Wed, 2012-05-09 at 13:47 -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote: > On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 1:36 PM, William J. Schmidt > wrote: > > Greetings, > > > > I've been debugging a Fedora 17 build problem on ppc64-redhat-linux, and > > ran into an issue with bitsizetype. I have

Build problem with libgo runtime

2012-05-10 Thread William J. Schmidt
I'm investigating another build failure for Fedora 17 (based on 4.7). The failing compile from the build log is as follows: /bin/sh ./libtool --tag=CC --mode=compile /builddir/build/BUILD/gcc-4.7.0-20120504/obj-ppc64-redhat-linux/./gcc/xgcc -B/builddir/build/BUILD/gcc-4.7.0-20120504/obj-ppc64-r

Re: GNU MPC 1.0 release candidate - Second call for help

2012-07-13 Thread William J. Schmidt
On Sat, 2012-07-14 at 01:00 +0200, Steven Bosscher wrote: > Andreas Enge wrote: > > > > powerpc-ibm-aix5.3.0.0, s390-linux-gnu, > > Perhaps Bill Schmidt can help here? > Unfortunately not, at least not directly. David Bernstein and Andreas Krebbel, respectively, might be able to point you to t