Re: Regression with "recomputation and PR 109154"

2023-03-31 Thread Andrew MacLeod via Gcc-patches
On 3/31/23 19:31, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2023 15:48:22 -0400 From: Andrew MacLeod via Gcc-patches Reply-To: Andrew MacLeod commit 55bf4f0d443e5adbacfcdbbebf4b2e0c74d1dcc8 Author: Andrew MacLeod Date: Fri Mar 31 15:42:43 2023 -0400 Adjust testcases to not produce

Re: Regression with "recomputation and PR 109154"

2023-03-31 Thread Hans-Peter Nilsson via Gcc-patches
> Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2023 15:48:22 -0400 > From: Andrew MacLeod via Gcc-patches > Reply-To: Andrew MacLeod > commit 55bf4f0d443e5adbacfcdbbebf4b2e0c74d1dcc8 > Author: Andrew MacLeod > Date: Fri Mar 31 15:42:43 2023 -0400 > > Adjust testcases to not produce errors.. > >

Re: Regression with "recomputation and PR 109154"

2023-03-31 Thread Jeff Law via Gcc-patches
On 3/31/23 14:16, Andrew MacLeod wrote: On 3/31/23 15:59, Jeff Law wrote: On 3/31/23 13:48, Andrew MacLeod wrote: should we do something like this to tweak the testcases?   or does someone have something else in mind? Go ahead and tweak the testcase.  Unless you want to revamp it per

Re: Regression with "recomputation and PR 109154"

2023-03-31 Thread Andrew MacLeod via Gcc-patches
On 3/31/23 15:59, Jeff Law wrote: On 3/31/23 13:48, Andrew MacLeod wrote: should we do something like this to tweak the testcases?   or does someone have something else in mind? Go ahead and tweak the testcase.  Unless you want to revamp it per Jakub's suggestions. not particularly  :-)

Re: Regression with "recomputation and PR 109154"

2023-03-31 Thread Jeff Law via Gcc-patches
On 3/31/23 13:48, Andrew MacLeod wrote: should we do something like this to tweak the testcases?   or does someone have something else in mind? Go ahead and tweak the testcase. Unless you want to revamp it per Jakub's suggestions. jeff

Re: Regression with "recomputation and PR 109154"

2023-03-31 Thread Andrew MacLeod via Gcc-patches
should we do something like this to tweak the testcases?   or does someone have something else in mind? Richi opened a PR for the STL failure (109350) Andrew On 3/31/23 13:37, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 01:02:18PM -0400, Andrew MacLeod wrote: I guess it figures the

Re: Regression with "recomputation and PR 109154"

2023-03-31 Thread Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 01:02:18PM -0400, Andrew MacLeod wrote: > I guess it figures the recip is safe to put in, there will not be a divide > by zero. I think the problem was that 1/d was hoisted before the loop; as long as it is guarded with the d > 0.01 or e > 0.005 condition, it is fine. The

Re: Regression with "recomputation and PR 109154"

2023-03-31 Thread Andrew MacLeod via Gcc-patches
On 3/31/23 12:20, Jeff Law wrote: On 3/31/23 10:12, Hans-Peter Nilsson via Gcc-patches wrote: Attached. I also removed the bogus warning in Walloc-13.c that no longer happens Add recursive GORI recompuations with a depth limit. PR tree-optimization/109154  

Re: Regression with "recomputation and PR 109154"

2023-03-31 Thread Jeff Law via Gcc-patches
On 3/31/23 10:12, Hans-Peter Nilsson via Gcc-patches wrote: Attached. I also removed the bogus warning in Walloc-13.c that no longer happens Add recursive GORI recompuations with a depth limit. PR tree-optimization/109154 gcc/ *

Regression with "recomputation and PR 109154"

2023-03-31 Thread Hans-Peter Nilsson via Gcc-patches
> Attached. I also removed the bogus warning in Walloc-13.c that no longer > happens > Add recursive GORI recompuations with a depth limit. > > PR tree-optimization/109154 > gcc/ > * gimple-range-gori.cc (gori_compute::may_recompute_p): Add depth >