On Sat, 5 Apr 2025, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Fri, Apr 04, 2025 at 07:51:54PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 04, 2025 at 03:06:52PM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote: > > > > 2025-04-04 Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> > > > > > > > > PR rtl-optimization/119594 > > > > * cse.cc (count_reg_usage): If INCR is 0, increment by 1 counts > > > > of encountered REGs equal to dest rather than incrementing by > > > > INCR > > > > counts of REGs not equal to dest. > > > > (delete_trivially_dead_insns): For kept non-DEBUG instructions > > > > call count_reg_usage with INCR 0. > > > > > > > > * gcc.dg/pr119594.c: New test. > > > > This bootstrapped/regtested successfully on x86_64-linux and i686-linux. > > > > > ...this looks ok to me as well. The reason for suggesting DF_INSN_USES > > > was that I thought it might be faster, and since it would be ok in that > > > context to err on the side of counting, without the precision needed > > > by count_reg_usage. > > > > > > On the PARALLEL thing: maybe at this stage it would be better to do the > > > minimum. Not a strong opinion though. > > > > > > So OK from my POV, but please give others time to comment. > > > > Though, Eric's version (slightly tweaked) seems to work on the testcase fine > > as well and is cheaper. Shall we go with that (if it passes > > bootstrap/regtest)? > > > > 2025-04-04 Eric Botcazou <botca...@adacore.com> > > Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> > > > > PR rtl-optimization/119594 > > * cse.cc (count_reg_usage): Count even x == dest regs if they have > > non-zero counts already and incr is positive. > > > > * gcc.dg/pr119594.c: New test. > > That one passed bootstrap/regtest on x86_64-linux and i686-linux > successfully as well.
OK for this one. Thanks, Richard.
