On Wed, 2012-07-18 at 11:01 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Wed, 18 Jul 2012, Steven Bosscher wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 9:59 AM, Richard Guenther <rguent...@suse.de> wrote: > > > On Tue, 17 Jul 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote: > > > > > >> I overlooked adding a pass-control flag for strength reduction, added > > >> here. I named it -ftree-slsr for consistency with other -ftree- flags, > > >> but could change it to -fgimple-slsr if you prefer that for a pass named > > >> gimple-ssa-... > > >> > > >> Bootstrapped and tested on powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu with no new > > >> regressions. Ok for trunk? > > > > > > The switch needs documentation in doc/invoke.texi. Other than that > > > it's fine to stick with -ftree-..., even that exposes details to our > > > users that are not necessary (RTL passes didn't have -frtl-... either). > > > So in the end, why not re-use -fstrength-reduce that is already available > > > (but stubbed out)? > > > > In the past, -fstrength-reduce applied to loop strength reduction in > > loop.c. I don't think it should be re-used for a completely different > > code transformation. > > Ok. I suppose -ftree-slsr is ok then.
It turns out I was looking at a very old copy of the manual, and the -ftree... stuff is not as prevalent now as it once was. I'll just go with -fslsr to be consistent with -fgcse, -fipa-sra, etc. Thanks for the pointer to doc/invoke.texi -- it appears I also failed to document -fhoist-adjacent-loads, so I will go ahead and do that as well. Thanks! Bill > > Thanks, > Richard. >
