On Tue, 29 Oct 2013, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 12:55:04PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
Surely you can't rely on CCP and VRP compute exactly the same
nonzero_bits. As you don't record/compute zero_bits you can't
tell whether a not set bit in nonzer_bits is don't know or
On Tue, 29 Oct 2013, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 04:29:56PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Surely you can't rely on CCP and VRP compute exactly the same
nonzero_bits. As you don't record/compute zero_bits you can't
tell whether a not set bit in nonzer_bits is don't
On Fri, 25 Oct 2013, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
tree-ssa-ccp.c already computes which bits are known to be zero, but
we preserve that info only for pointers and not for integers.
This patch changes SSA_NAME_RANGE_INFO, so we preserve that info even for
integers. The bitmask is also computed
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 12:55:04PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
Surely you can't rely on CCP and VRP compute exactly the same
nonzero_bits. As you don't record/compute zero_bits you can't
tell whether a not set bit in nonzer_bits is don't know or
if it is zero. And you cannot do an assert
Hi!
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 04:29:56PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Surely you can't rely on CCP and VRP compute exactly the same
nonzero_bits. As you don't record/compute zero_bits you can't
tell whether a not set bit in nonzer_bits is don't know or
if it is zero. And you cannot do an
Hi!
tree-ssa-ccp.c already computes which bits are known to be zero, but
we preserve that info only for pointers and not for integers.
This patch changes SSA_NAME_RANGE_INFO, so we preserve that info even for
integers. The bitmask is also computed from range info.
There are no users of this
