On Thu, Dec 18, 2025 at 02:54:14PM +0000, Victor Do Nascimento wrote:
> The `recompute_dominator' function used in the code fragment within
> this patch assumes correctness in the rest of the CFG. Consequently,
> it is wrong to rely upon it before the subsequent updates are made in
> the "Update dominators for multiple exits" loop in the function.
>
> Furthermore, if `loop_exit' == `scalar_exit', the "Update dominators for
> multiple exits" logic will already take care of updating the
> dominator for `scalar_exit->dest', such that the moved statement is
> unnecessary.
Just formatting nits, will defer to Richi or Tamar for actual review.
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> PR tree-optimization/123152
> * tree-vect-loop-manip.cc
> (slpeel_tree_duplicate_loop_to_edge_cfg): Correct order of
> dominator update
* tree-vect-loop-manip.cc (slpeel_tree_duplicate_loop_to_edge_cfg):
Correct order of dominator update.
fits in nicely into 76 columns, no need to split line before that. And
don't forget the dot at the end of change description.
> @@ -2024,6 +2019,11 @@ slpeel_tree_duplicate_loop_to_edge_cfg (class loop
> *loop, edge loop_exit,
> }
> }
> }
> +
> + if (create_main_e && (loop_exit != scalar_exit))
Why the ()s around the comparison?
> + set_immediate_dominator (CDI_DOMINATORS, scalar_exit->dest,
> + recompute_dominator (CDI_DOMINATORS,
> + scalar_exit->dest));
> }
Jakub
