On 11/10/2016 06:54 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Pat Haugen
> wrote:
>> > The following fixes a problem introduced by my earlier loop unroller
>> > patch, https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-09/msg01612.html. In
>> > instances where the niter expr is not reliab
On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Pat Haugen wrote:
> The following fixes a problem introduced by my earlier loop unroller patch,
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-09/msg01612.html. In instances where
> the niter expr is not reliable we need to still emit an initial peel copy of
> the loo
On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 11:13 PM, Pat Haugen wrote:
> The following fixes a problem introduced by my earlier loop unroller patch,
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-09/msg01612.html. In instances where
> the niter expr is not reliable we need to still emit an initial peel copy of
> the lo
The following fixes a problem introduced by my earlier loop unroller patch,
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-09/msg01612.html. In instances where
the niter expr is not reliable we need to still emit an initial peel copy of
the loop.
Bootstrap/regtest on powerpc64le with no new regression
