This patch fixes the failures described in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49960
It also fixes bzips when run with autopar enabled.
In both cases the self dependences are not handled correctly.
In the first case, a non affine access is analyzed:
in the second, the distance vector is n
gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org wrote on 17/10/2011 09:03:59 AM:
> From: Richard Guenther
> To: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Sebastian Pop
> Date: 17/10/2011 09:04 AM
> Subject: Re: [patch] Fix PR tree-optimization/49960 ,Fix self data
dependence
3.3 X
436.cactusADM 4.5 X
459.GemsFDTD1.27 X
481.wrf 1.25 X
Bootstrap and testsuite (with -ftree-parallelize-loops=4) pass
successfully.
spec-2006 showed no regressions.
OK for trunk?
Thanks,
razya
2012-05-08 Razya Ladelsky
* tree-parloops.c
obvious,
2012-05-20 Razya Ladelsky
* tree-parloops.c : Add myself to contributors, update
TODO list, add link to wiki.
Thanks,
Razya
Index: tree-parloops.c
===
--- tree-parloops.c (revision 187694)
+++ tree
Hi,
I need to use do_while_loop_p, but I'm not sure its functionality is what
I expected it to be.
This is the part that I do not understand:
/* If the header contains just a condition, it is not a do-while loop. */
stmt = last_and_only_stmt (loop->header);
if (stmt
&& gimple_code (st
.c.
2012-03-26 Razya Ladelsky
PR tree-optimization/46886
* tree-parloops.c (transform_to_exit_first_loop):Set
number of iterations correctly when the body may appear at the latch.
(pallelize_loops): Remove the condition preventing
do-while
Richard Guenther wrote on 26/03/2012 01:23:15 PM:
> From: Richard Guenther
> To: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Date: 26/03/2012 01:23 PM
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Permanent Fix for PR46886
>
> On Mon, 26 Mar 2012, Razya Ladelsky wrote:
>
> +
> + /* if the latch contains more than the one statemnt of control
variable
> + increment then it contains the body. */
> + if (exit_1->dest == loop->latch && last_and_only_stmt (loop->latch))
> new_rhs = gimple_cond_rhs (cond_stmt);
>
> please check what the comment suggests, t
lelized.
I also ran spec-2006, and it showed no regressions.
2012-04-20 Razya Ladelsky
PR tree-optimization/46886
* tree-parloops.c (transform_to_exit_first_loop): Remove
setting of number of iterations according to the loop pattern.
Duplicat
> > I hope it's clearer now, I will add a comment to the code, and submit
it
> > before committing it.
>
> No, it's not clearer, because it is not clear why you need to add the
hack
> instead of avoiding the 2nd access function. And iff you add the hack it
> needs a comment why zero should be sp
gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org wrote on 21/11/2011 02:57:07 PM:
> From: Jakub Jelinek
> To: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
> Cc: Richard Guenther , GCC Patches patc...@gcc.gnu.org>
> Date: 21/11/2011 02:57 PM
> Subject: Re: [PATCH, take 2] Fix PR tree-optimization/49960
Jakub Jelinek wrote on 21/11/2011 03:59:15 PM:
> From: Jakub Jelinek
> To: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
> Cc: GCC Patches , Richard Guenther
>
> Date: 21/11/2011 03:59 PM
> Subject: Re: [PATCH, take 2] Fix PR tree-optimization/49960 ,Fix
> self data dependence
>
&
Jakub Jelinek wrote on 21/11/2011 05:07:54 PM:
> From: Jakub Jelinek
> To: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
> Cc: GCC Patches , Richard Guenther
>
> Date: 21/11/2011 05:08 PM
> Subject: Re: [PATCH, take 2] Fix PR tree-optimization/49960 ,Fix
> self data dependence
>
&
Jakub Jelinek wrote on 21/11/2011 07:25:10 PM:
> From: Jakub Jelinek
> To: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
> Cc: GCC Patches , Richard Guenther
>
> Date: 21/11/2011 07:25 PM
> Subject: Re: [PATCH, take 2] Fix PR tree-optimization/49960 ,Fix
> self data dependence
>
&
orig_loop)->src;
+ gsi1 = gsi_after_labels (preheader);
new_rhs = force_gimple_operand_gsi (&gsi1, new_rhs, true,
NULL_TREE,false,GSI_CONTINUE_LINKING);
}
=
22-12-2009 Razya Ladelsky
* tree-cfg.c (gimple_duplicate_sese
Zdenek Dvorak wrote on 30/06/2011 15:21:43:
> From: Zdenek Dvorak
> To: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Richard Guenther
> Date: 30/06/2011 15:21
> Subject: Re: PATCH] PR 49580
>
> Hi,
>
> > This patch fixes the build failure of g
Zdenek Dvorak wrote on 30/06/2011 15:21:43:
> From: Zdenek Dvorak
> To: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Richard Guenther
> Date: 30/06/2011 15:21
> Subject: Re: PATCH] PR 49580
>
> Hi,
>
> > This patch fixes the build failure of g
Zdenek Dvorak wrote on 05/07/2011 13:37:41:
> From: Zdenek Dvorak
> To: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Richard Guenther
> Date: 05/07/2011 13:37
> Subject: Re: PATCH] PR 49580
>
> Hi,
>
> > I moved the adjustment
Hi,
This patch fixes the build failure of cactusADM and dealII spec2006
benchmarks when autopar is enabled.
(for powerpc they fail only when -m32 is additionally enabled)
The problem originated in canonicalize_loop_ivs, where we iterate the
header's phis in order to base all
the induction varia
Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM wrote on 25/07/2011 05:44:02 PM:
> From: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: Zdenek Dvorak , Richard Guenther
>
> Date: 25/07/2011 05:44 PM
> Subject: [patch] Fix PR tree-optimization/49471
>
> Hi,
>
> This pa
Richard Guenther wrote on 25/07/2011 05:54:28
PM:
> From: Richard Guenther
> To: Razya Ladelsky/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Zdenek Dvorak
> , Sebastian Pop
> Date: 25/07/2011 05:54 PM
> Subject: Re: [patch] Fix PR tree-optimization/49471
>
> On M
21 matches
Mail list logo
