On Sun, 28 Apr 2013, Tom de Vries wrote:
> On 26/04/13 16:27, Tom de Vries wrote:
> > On 25/04/13 16:19, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> >> and compared to the previous patch changed the tree-ssa-tailmerge.c
> >> part to deal with merging of loop latch and loop preheader (even
> >> if that's a really
On 26/04/13 16:27, Tom de Vries wrote:
> On 25/04/13 16:19, Richard Biener wrote:
>
>> and compared to the previous patch changed the tree-ssa-tailmerge.c
>> part to deal with merging of loop latch and loop preheader (even
>> if that's a really bad idea) to not regress gcc.dg/pr50763.c.
>> Any sug
On 25/04/13 16:19, Richard Biener wrote:
> and compared to the previous patch changed the tree-ssa-tailmerge.c
> part to deal with merging of loop latch and loop preheader (even
> if that's a really bad idea) to not regress gcc.dg/pr50763.c.
> Any suggestion on how to improve that part welcome.
>
On Thu, 25 Apr 2013, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 04:19:20PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > This is the patch that I consider final as a first step (to avoid
> > changing too much at once). I've analyzed the few failures
> > and compared to the previous patch changed the
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 04:19:20PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> This is the patch that I consider final as a first step (to avoid
> changing too much at once). I've analyzed the few failures
> and compared to the previous patch changed the tree-ssa-tailmerge.c
> part to deal with merging of l
This is the patch that I consider final as a first step (to avoid
changing too much at once). I've analyzed the few failures
and compared to the previous patch changed the tree-ssa-tailmerge.c
part to deal with merging of loop latch and loop preheader (even
if that's a really bad idea) to not reg
