On Sat, May 18, 2019 at 2:56 PM Marc Glisse wrote:
>
> On Wed, 15 May 2019, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > As you write the heuristic you could as well remove the malloc result
> > points-to set from the others after points-to analysis is finished?
>
> Looking at the vector testcase:
>
> #include
>
On Wed, 15 May 2019, Richard Biener wrote:
As you write the heuristic you could as well remove the malloc result
points-to set from the others after points-to analysis is finished?
Looking at the vector testcase:
#include
#include
#include
inline void* operator new(std::size_t n){return
On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 4:05 PM Marc Glisse wrote:
>
> On Tue, 14 May 2019, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> >>> In princple PTA should know the aliasing cannot happen but possibly
> >>> the info is either lost or the IL is too obfuscated at the point it gets
> >>> computed. (hello C++...)
> >>
> >> We
On Tue, 14 May 2019, Richard Biener wrote:
In princple PTA should know the aliasing cannot happen but possibly
the info is either lost or the IL is too obfuscated at the point it gets
computed. (hello C++...)
We don't need much obfuscation for this, a simple C program
int g;
int*f(int**p){
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 3:38 PM Marc Glisse wrote:
>
> On Mon, 13 May 2019, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 2:51 PM Marc Glisse wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sun, 12 May 2019, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> >>
> >>> Marc Glisse writes:
> Hello,
>
> this patch lets gcc know
Here is a version of the patch with a cheaper test, and an extra testcase
for Martin.
(I kept the tree-ssa-loop-niter.c part although I am not using it anymore)
2019-05-15 Marc Glisse
gcc/
* tree-ssa-loop-niter.c (stmt_dominates_stmt_p): Handle NULL
basic block.
*
On 5/13/19 11:37 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Mon, 13 May 2019, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 5/11/19 5:33 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
Hello,
this patch lets gcc know that if a pointer existed before the call to
malloc, the result of malloc cannot alias it. This is a bit ad hoc
and fragile. A small
On Mon, 13 May 2019, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 5/11/19 5:33 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
Hello,
this patch lets gcc know that if a pointer existed before the call to
malloc, the result of malloc cannot alias it. This is a bit ad hoc and
fragile. A small improvement would be, when the 2 statements
On 5/13/19 10:49 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 10:36:00AM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 5/11/19 5:33 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
Hello,
this patch lets gcc know that if a pointer existed before the call to
malloc, the result of malloc cannot alias it. This is a bit ad hoc and
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 10:36:00AM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 5/11/19 5:33 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > this patch lets gcc know that if a pointer existed before the call to
> > malloc, the result of malloc cannot alias it. This is a bit ad hoc and
> > fragile. A small
On 5/11/19 5:33 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
Hello,
this patch lets gcc know that if a pointer existed before the call to
malloc, the result of malloc cannot alias it. This is a bit ad hoc and
fragile. A small improvement would be, when the 2 statements are in the
same bb but in the wrong order,
On Mon, 13 May 2019, Richard Biener wrote:
On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 2:51 PM Marc Glisse wrote:
On Sun, 12 May 2019, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Marc Glisse writes:
Hello,
this patch lets gcc know that if a pointer existed before the call to
malloc, the result of malloc cannot alias it. This
On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 2:51 PM Marc Glisse wrote:
>
> On Sun, 12 May 2019, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>
> > Marc Glisse writes:
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> this patch lets gcc know that if a pointer existed before the call to
> >> malloc, the result of malloc cannot alias it. This is a bit ad hoc and
>
On Sun, 12 May 2019, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Marc Glisse writes:
Hello,
this patch lets gcc know that if a pointer existed before the call to
malloc, the result of malloc cannot alias it. This is a bit ad hoc and
fragile. A small improvement would be, when the 2 statements are in the
same
Marc Glisse writes:
> Hello,
>
> this patch lets gcc know that if a pointer existed before the call to
> malloc, the result of malloc cannot alias it. This is a bit ad hoc and
> fragile. A small improvement would be, when the 2 statements are in the
> same bb but in the wrong order, to check
On Sun, 12 May 2019, Marc Glisse wrote:
this patch lets gcc know that if a pointer existed before the call to malloc,
the result of malloc cannot alias it. This is a bit ad hoc and fragile. A
small improvement would be, when the 2 statements are in the same bb but in
the wrong order, to check
Hello,
this patch lets gcc know that if a pointer existed before the call to
malloc, the result of malloc cannot alias it. This is a bit ad hoc and
fragile. A small improvement would be, when the 2 statements are in the
same bb but in the wrong order, to check if there is any statement in
17 matches
Mail list logo
