[Bug tree-optimization/87776] [9 Regression] Compile time hog during RPO VN

2018-11-02 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87776

Richard Biener  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |FIXED

--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener  ---
Fixed.

[Bug tree-optimization/87776] [9 Regression] Compile time hog during RPO VN

2018-11-02 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87776

--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener  ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Nov  2 07:53:48 2018
New Revision: 265739

URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265739=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-11-02  Richard Biener  

PR tree-optimization/87776
* tree-ssa-sccvn.c (do_rpo_vn): Do not mark backedges
executable when iterating but running into rpo-vn-max-loop-depth
and not eliding the iteration.

* gcc.dg/torture/pr87776.c: New testcase.

Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr87776.c
Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/tree-ssa-sccvn.c

[Bug tree-optimization/87776] [9 Regression] Compile time hog during RPO VN

2018-10-31 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87776

Richard Biener  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org  |rguenth at gcc dot 
gnu.org

--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener  ---
Mine, somehow missed this.

[Bug tree-optimization/87776] [9 Regression] Compile time hog during RPO VN

2018-10-31 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87776

Richard Biener  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|--- |9.0

[Bug tree-optimization/87776] [9 Regression] Compile time hog during RPO VN

2018-10-29 Thread marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87776

Martin Liška  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
   Last reconfirmed||2018-10-29
 CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
 Ever confirmed|0   |1
  Known to fail||9.0

--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška  ---
Confirmed, started to be slow with r264241.