Re: [PATCH] Loop split upon semi-invariant condition (PR tree-optimization/89134)

Hi Richard, Since gcc 9 has been released, will you get some time to take a look at this patch? Thanks. Feng From: Richard Biener Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2019 4:31:49 PM To: Feng Xue OS Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Loop split upon

Re: [PATCH, RFC, rs6000] PR80791 Consider doloop in ivopts

On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 2:02 PM Kewen.Lin wrote: > > on 2019/5/5 下午12:04, Bin.Cheng wrote: > > On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 11:23 AM Kewen.Lin wrote: > + /* Some compare iv_use is probably useless once the doloop > optimization > + performs. */ > + if (tailor_cmp_p) > +

Re: A bug in vrp_meet?

> I have now applied this variant. You backported it onto the 8 branch on Friday: 2019-05-03 Richard Biener Backport from mainline [...] 2019-03-07 Richard Biener PR tree-optimization/89595 * tree-ssa-dom.c (dom_opt_dom_walker::optimize_stmt): Take

New Swedish PO file for 'gcc' (version 9.1-b20190414)

Hello, gentle maintainer. This is a message from the Translation Project robot. A revised PO file for textual domain 'gcc' has been submitted by the Swedish team of translators. The file is available at: https://translationproject.org/latest/gcc/sv.po (This file,

Re: [PATCH, RFC, rs6000] PR80791 Consider doloop in ivopts

On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 12:04:00PM +0800, Bin.Cheng wrote: > On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 11:23 AM Kewen.Lin wrote: > > I can't really follow this. If it's predicted to be transformed to doloop, > > I think it should not be undoed any more, since it's useless to consider > > this cmp iv use. Whatever

[patch, committed] Fix gcc-7 regression in front-end optimization

Hello world, I have just committed the attached patch as obvious after regresson-testing - it fixed a rare beast, a gcc 7.4-only regression. I have also committed the test case to trunk, to make sure that this does not re-break. No real need to commit to the other branches, I think. Regards

Re: [PATCH] Fix a typo in two_value_replacement function

On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 01:31:12AM -0500, Li Jia He wrote: > GCC revision 267634 implemented two_value_replacement function. > However, a typo occurred during the parameter check, which caused > us to miss some optimizations. Thanks for catching this. > The regression testing for the patch was

[PATCH] Fix a typo in two_value_replacement function

Hi, GCC revision 267634 implemented two_value_replacement function. However, a typo occurred during the parameter check, which caused us to miss some optimizations. The intent of the code might be to check that the input parameters are const int and their difference is one. However, when I read

[PING] [PATCH V3] PR88497 - Extend reassoc for vector bit_field_ref

Hi, I'd like to gentle ping for this patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-03/msg00966.html OK for trunk now? Thanks! on 2019/3/20 上午11:14, Kewen.Lin wrote: > Hi, > > Please refer to below link for previous threads. > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-03/msg00348.html > >

Re: [PATCH PR90240][RFC]Avoid scaling cost overflow by introducing scaling bound

Hmm, mis-attached the old version patch. Here is the updated one. Thanks, bin -- Sender:bin.cheng Sent At:2019 May 5 (Sun.) 13:54 Recipient:Richard Biener Cc:GCC Patches Subject:Re: [PATCH PR90240][RFC]Avoid scaling cost

Re: [PATCH PR90078]Capping comp_cost computation in ivopts

> -- > Sender:Jakub Jelinek > Sent At:2019 Apr. 17 (Wed.) 19:27 > Recipient:Bin.Cheng > Cc:bin.cheng ; GCC Patches > > Subject:Re: [PATCH PR90078]Capping comp_cost computation in ivopts > > > On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 07:14:05PM

Re: [PATCH, RFC, rs6000] PR80791 Consider doloop in ivopts

on 2019/5/5 下午12:04, Bin.Cheng wrote: > On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 11:23 AM Kewen.Lin wrote: + /* Some compare iv_use is probably useless once the doloop optimization + performs. */ + if (tailor_cmp_p) +tailor_cmp_uses (data); >>> Function tailor_cmp_uses sets