Thanks Jeff for this too.
Best wishes,
Navid.
From: Jeff Law
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2021 19:09
To: Richard Biener; Navid Rahimi
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH] PR tree-optimization/102232 Adding a
missing pattern to
On 11/10/2021 1:35 AM, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 5:25 PM Navid Rahimi wrote:
Hi Richard,
Thank you so much for your detailed feedback. I am attaching another version of
the patch which does include all the changes you mentioned.
Bellow you can see my res
gt; Then you have to have at least -O1 to have it optimized. Granted, I am not
> doing that in the testcase. In the new patch I am changing it to -O. Let me
> know if you have any suggestions.
-O is fine, generally at -O0 we shouldn't expect such transforms to
happen (but they still d
a;
Then you have to have at least -O1 to have it optimized. Granted, I am not
doing that in the testcase. In the new patch I am changing it to -O. Let me
know if you have any suggestions.
Best wishes,
Navid.
____________
From: Richard Biener
Sent: Tuesday, November
On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 5:12 AM Navid Rahimi via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> Hi GCC community,
>
> This patch will add the missed pattern described in bug 102232 [1] to the
> match.pd. The testcase will test whether the multiplication and division has
> been removed from the code or not. The correctne
behalf of Navid Rahimi via Gcc-patches
Sent: Monday, November 8, 2021 20:11
To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [PATCH] PR tree-optimization/102232 Adding a missing
pattern to match.pd
Hi GCC community,
This patch will add the missed pattern described in bug 102232 [1] to the
Hi GCC community,
This patch will add the missed pattern described in bug 102232 [1] to the
match.pd. The testcase will test whether the multiplication and division has
been removed from the code or not. The correctness proof for this pattern is
here [2] in case anyone is curious.
PR tree-opti
