On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 4:29 AM yangyang (ET) <yangyang...@huawei.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Hi, > > > > > > This is a simple fix for pr95855. > > > > > > With this fix, pass_split_paths can recognize the if-conversion > > opportunity of the testcase and doesn't duplicate the corresponding block. > > > > > > Added one testcase for this. Bootstrap and tested on both aarch64 and > > x86 Linux platform, no new regression witnessed. > > > > > > Ok for trunk? > > > > Can you try using the num_stmts_in_pred[12] counts instead of using > > empty_block_p? > > It' ok to using num_stmts_in_pred[12] to judge whether the pred[12] is > empty since bb's immediate dominator can't meet the constraints > "single_pred_p (pred[12]) && single_pred (pred[12]) == pred[21]". > > > > > Your matching doesn't allow for FP constants like > > > > dmax[0] = d1[i] < 1.0 ? 1.0 : d1[i]; > > > > since FP constants are not shared. You likely want to use operand_equal_p > > to > > do the PHI argument comparison. > > That's right, after using operand_equal_p instead of == to do the PHI argument > Comparison, the mentioned case can be covered as well. > > > > > Thanks, > > Richard. > > Thanks for your suggestions. We have revised our patch based on your > suggestions. > > Bootstrap and tested on both aarch64 and x86 Linux platform. Does the v1 > patch looks better?
Yes. This variant is OK. Thanks, Richard. > Yang Yang > > +2020-06-30 Yang Yang <yangyang...@huawei.com> > + > + PR tree-optimization/95855 > + * gimple-ssa-split-paths.c (is_feasible_trace): Add extra > + checks to recognize a missed if-conversion opportunity when > + judging whether to duplicate a block. > + > > +2020-06-30 Yang Yang <yangyang...@huawei.com> > + > + PR tree-optimization/95855 > + * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/split-paths-12.c: New testcase. > +
