On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 04:02:17PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> Yes please, this should be safe. All of the above do not look at immediate
> uses but at most use-def links.
Ok, here is what I've committed after another bootstrap/regtest:
2016-09-13 Jakub Jelinek
PR tree-optimizati
On September 13, 2016 3:32:33 PM GMT+02:00, Jakub Jelinek
wrote:
>On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 03:21:47PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
>> > The following testcase ICEs because SSA_NAME IMM links are broken.
>> > I've tracked it to DOM's optimize_stmt, a GIMPLE_COND in there is
>> > changed, marked as
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 03:21:47PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > The following testcase ICEs because SSA_NAME IMM links are broken.
> > I've tracked it to DOM's optimize_stmt, a GIMPLE_COND in there is
> > changed, marked as modified, then in optimize_stmt
> > if (gimple_modified_p (stmt) || m
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 9:46 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> The following testcase ICEs because SSA_NAME IMM links are broken.
> I've tracked it to DOM's optimize_stmt, a GIMPLE_COND in there is
> changed, marked as modified, then in optimize_stmt
> if (gimple_modified_p (stmt) || modified_p
Hi!
The following testcase ICEs because SSA_NAME IMM links are broken.
I've tracked it to DOM's optimize_stmt, a GIMPLE_COND in there is
changed, marked as modified, then in optimize_stmt
if (gimple_modified_p (stmt) || modified_p)
{
tree val = NULL;
update_stmt_if_modified (stm
