Commit a365945b by Richard Biener Committed by Richard Biener

re PR tree-optimization/83385 ([graphite] Wrong code w/ -O1 -floop-nest-optimize)

2017-12-12  Richard Biener  <rguenther@suse.de>

	PR tree-optimization/83385
	* graphite-scop-detection.c (get_order, order): Remove.
	(bb_to_rpo): New global.
	(cmp_pbbs): Adjust.
	(build_scops): Sort pbbs in RPO order.

	* gcc.dg/graphite/pr83385.c: New testcase.

From-SVN: r255579
parent c5060cad
2017-12-12 Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
PR tree-optimization/83385
* graphite-scop-detection.c (get_order, order): Remove.
(bb_to_rpo): New global.
(cmp_pbbs): Adjust.
(build_scops): Sort pbbs in RPO order.
2017-12-12 James Greenhalgh <james.greenhalgh@arm.com>
* combine.c (simplify_set): Do not transform subregs to zero_extends
......@@ -1608,26 +1608,7 @@ gather_bbs::after_dom_children (basic_block bb)
/* Compute sth like an execution order, dominator order with first executing
edges that stay inside the current loop, delaying processing exit edges. */
static vec<unsigned> order;
static void
get_order (scop_p scop, basic_block bb, vec<unsigned> *order, unsigned *dfs_num)
{
if (! bb_in_sese_p (bb, scop->scop_info->region))
return;
(*order)[bb->index] = (*dfs_num)++;
for (basic_block son = first_dom_son (CDI_DOMINATORS, bb);
son;
son = next_dom_son (CDI_DOMINATORS, son))
if (flow_bb_inside_loop_p (bb->loop_father, son))
get_order (scop, son, order, dfs_num);
for (basic_block son = first_dom_son (CDI_DOMINATORS, bb);
son;
son = next_dom_son (CDI_DOMINATORS, son))
if (! flow_bb_inside_loop_p (bb->loop_father, son))
get_order (scop, son, order, dfs_num);
}
static int *bb_to_rpo;
/* Helper for qsort, sorting after order above. */
......@@ -1636,9 +1617,11 @@ cmp_pbbs (const void *pa, const void *pb)
{
poly_bb_p bb1 = *((const poly_bb_p *)pa);
poly_bb_p bb2 = *((const poly_bb_p *)pb);
if (order[bb1->black_box->bb->index] < order[bb2->black_box->bb->index])
if (bb_to_rpo[bb1->black_box->bb->index]
< bb_to_rpo[bb2->black_box->bb->index])
return -1;
else if (order[bb1->black_box->bb->index] > order[bb2->black_box->bb->index])
else if (bb_to_rpo[bb1->black_box->bb->index]
> bb_to_rpo[bb2->black_box->bb->index])
return 1;
else
return 0;
......@@ -1662,7 +1645,7 @@ build_scops (vec<scop_p> *scops)
/* Domwalk needs a bb to RPO mapping. Compute it once here. */
int *postorder = XNEWVEC (int, n_basic_blocks_for_fn (cfun));
int postorder_num = pre_and_rev_post_order_compute (NULL, postorder, true);
int *bb_to_rpo = XNEWVEC (int, last_basic_block_for_fn (cfun));
bb_to_rpo = XNEWVEC (int, last_basic_block_for_fn (cfun));
for (int i = 0; i < postorder_num; ++i)
bb_to_rpo[postorder[i]] = i;
free (postorder);
......@@ -1676,16 +1659,8 @@ build_scops (vec<scop_p> *scops)
/* Record all basic blocks and their conditions in REGION. */
gather_bbs (CDI_DOMINATORS, scop, bb_to_rpo).walk (s->entry->dest);
/* domwalk does not fulfil our code-generations constraints on the
order of pbb which is to produce sth like execution order, delaying
exection of loop exit edges. So compute such order and sort after
that. */
order.create (last_basic_block_for_fn (cfun));
order.quick_grow (last_basic_block_for_fn (cfun));
unsigned dfs_num = 0;
get_order (scop, s->entry->dest, &order, &dfs_num);
/* Sort pbbs after execution order for initial schedule generation. */
scop->pbbs.qsort (cmp_pbbs);
order.release ();
if (! build_alias_set (scop))
{
......@@ -1732,6 +1707,7 @@ build_scops (vec<scop_p> *scops)
}
free (bb_to_rpo);
bb_to_rpo = NULL;
DEBUG_PRINT (dp << "number of SCoPs: " << (scops ? scops->length () : 0););
}
......
2017-12-12 Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
PR tree-optimization/83385
* gcc.dg/graphite/pr83385.c: New testcase.
2017-12-12 Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>
PR c/82679
......
/* { dg-do run } */
/* { dg-options "-O1 -floop-nest-optimize" } */
int xc, n1 = 0;
int bx[2];
int
main (void)
{
int aj = 1;
int cs;
for (cs = aj; cs >= 0; --cs)
{
int sq;
for (sq = 0; sq < 2; ++sq)
{
if (aj != 0)
--n1;
for (xc = 0; xc < 2; ++xc)
bx[xc] = 0;
}
--aj;
}
if (n1 != -2)
__builtin_abort ();
return 0;
}
Markdown is supported
0% or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment