Re: [RFC] Extend ipa-bitwise-cp with pointer alignment propagation

> On 6 October 2016 at 18:51, Jan Hubicka wrote: > >> > > >> > What do you mean by "for instance?" What are the other cases when it > >> > happens? > >> Well ipa_get_type() returned NULL for 481.wrf, and I assumed it was a > >> fortran-only > >> code-base but apparently it's a

Re: [RFC] Extend ipa-bitwise-cp with pointer alignment propagation

On 6 October 2016 at 18:51, Jan Hubicka wrote: >> > >> > What do you mean by "for instance?" What are the other cases when it >> > happens? >> Well ipa_get_type() returned NULL for 481.wrf, and I assumed it was a >> fortran-only >> code-base but apparently it's a mix of C and

Re: [RFC] Extend ipa-bitwise-cp with pointer alignment propagation

> > > > What do you mean by "for instance?" What are the other cases when it > > happens? > Well ipa_get_type() returned NULL for 481.wrf, and I assumed it was a > fortran-only > code-base but apparently it's a mix of C and fortran. Yep, I also have expreinece that the K style declarations are

Re: [RFC] Extend ipa-bitwise-cp with pointer alignment propagation

On 5 October 2016 at 19:45, Martin Jambor wrote: > Hi, > > sorry, my main desktop disk has died (a slow but certain) death so I > am not particularly responsive either. > > On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 12:37:38AM +0530, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: >> On 22 September 2016 at 17:26, Jan

Re: [RFC] Extend ipa-bitwise-cp with pointer alignment propagation

Hi, sorry, my main desktop disk has died (a slow but certain) death so I am not particularly responsive either. On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 12:37:38AM +0530, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > On 22 September 2016 at 17:26, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > Yes, can you please verify that alignments

Re: [RFC] Extend ipa-bitwise-cp with pointer alignment propagation

> Hi, > Sorry for late response, I was travelling. > I tried to verify the alignments are monotonously worse with the > attached patch (verify.diff), > which asserts that alignment lattice is not better than bits lattice > during each propagation > step in propagate_constants_accross_call(). >

Re: [RFC] Extend ipa-bitwise-cp with pointer alignment propagation

On 22 September 2016 at 17:26, Jan Hubicka wrote: >> Hi, >> The attached patch tries to extend ipa bits propagation to handle >> pointer alignment propagation. >> The patch just disables ipa-cp-alignment pass, I suppose we want to >> eventually remove it ? > > Yes, can you please

Re: [RFC] Extend ipa-bitwise-cp with pointer alignment propagation

> Hi, > The attached patch tries to extend ipa bits propagation to handle > pointer alignment propagation. > The patch just disables ipa-cp-alignment pass, I suppose we want to > eventually remove it ? Yes, can you please verify that alignments it computes are monotonously worse than those your

Re: [RFC] Extend ipa-bitwise-cp with pointer alignment propagation

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 11:21 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 6:44 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni > wrote: >> Hi, >> The attached patch tries to extend ipa bits propagation to handle >> pointer alignment propagation. >> The

Re: [RFC] Extend ipa-bitwise-cp with pointer alignment propagation

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 6:44 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > Hi, > The attached patch tries to extend ipa bits propagation to handle > pointer alignment propagation. > The patch just disables ipa-cp-alignment pass, I suppose we want to > eventually remove it ? > >

[RFC] Extend ipa-bitwise-cp with pointer alignment propagation

Hi, The attached patch tries to extend ipa bits propagation to handle pointer alignment propagation. The patch just disables ipa-cp-alignment pass, I suppose we want to eventually remove it ? Bootstrap+tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Cross-tested on arm*-*-*, aarch64*-*-*. Does the patch look