On 10/31/2011 09:19 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 10/30/2011 10:54 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Tom de Vries tom_devr...@mentor.com wrote:
On 10/30/2011 09:20 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
Richard,
I have a fix for PR50878.
Sorry, with patch this time.
Ok for now,
On 11/01/2011 10:43 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 9:19 PM, Tom de Vries tom_devr...@mentor.com wrote:
On 10/30/2011 10:54 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Tom de Vries tom_devr...@mentor.com
wrote:
On 10/30/2011 09:20 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 9:19 PM, Tom de Vries tom_devr...@mentor.com wrote:
On 10/30/2011 10:54 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Tom de Vries tom_devr...@mentor.com wrote:
On 10/30/2011 09:20 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
Richard,
I have a fix for PR50878.
Sorry, with
On 10/30/2011 10:54 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Tom de Vries tom_devr...@mentor.com wrote:
On 10/30/2011 09:20 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
Richard,
I have a fix for PR50878.
Sorry, with patch this time.
Ok for now, but see Davids mail and the complexity issue
Richard,
I have a fix for PR50878.
A simplified form of the problem from the test-case of the PR is shown in this
cfg. Block 12 has as direct dominator block 5.
5
/ \
/ \
* *
6 7
| |
| |
* *
8 9
\ /
\ /
On 10/30/2011 09:20 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
Richard,
I have a fix for PR50878.
Sorry, with patch this time.
Thanks,
- Tom
A simplified form of the problem from the test-case of the PR is shown in this
cfg. Block 12 has as direct dominator block 5.
5
/ \
/ \
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Tom de Vries tom_devr...@mentor.com wrote:
On 10/30/2011 09:20 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
Richard,
I have a fix for PR50878.
Sorry, with patch this time.
Ok for now, but see Davids mail and the complexity issue with iteratively
updating dominators. It seems to
