On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 12:07 PM, Bin Cheng <bin.ch...@arm.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> A address canonicalization interface was introduced by my original patch to >> PR69052. The interface sorts sub-parts in an address expression based on >> precedences defined by function commutative_operand_precedence. It also >> assumes that all CONST_INT sub-parts are at the end of vector after sorting. >> But this is not always true because commutative_operand_precedence sets the >> same precedence to both CONST_INT and CONST_WIDE_INT. The patch could be >> broken in cases which have CONST_WIDE_INT sorted after CONST_INT. Even >> though I don't think we can really run into such complicated case, I worked >> out a patch forcing CONST_INT to lower precedence than CONST_WIDE_INT, so >> that for sure it will be sorted after all other kinds sub-parts. >> >> This is an obvious change. Bootstrap&test on x86_64, bootstrap&test on >> AArch64. Is it OK for this stage? > > I believe the obvious change would be to change > commutative_operand_precedence to pre-CONST_WIDE_INT behavior, namely > giving CONST_WIDE_INT the same precedence as CONST_DOUBLE. Yes, but I am not sure what else this change will affect, so I made the smallest change in the original code. I am testing this now. It would be great if anyone describes it a bit.
Thanks, bin > > Richard. > > > >> Thanks, >> bin >> >> 2016-03-04 Bin Cheng <bin.ch...@arm.com> >> >> PR rtl-optimization/69052 >> * loop-invariant.c (compare_address_parts): Force CONST_INT to lower >> precedence than CONST_WIDE_INT.
