* cgraph.h (cgraph_edge_p): New.

[pf3gnuchains/gcc-fork.git] / gcc / loop-unroll.c

diff --git a/gcc/loop-unroll.c b/gcc/loop-unroll.c
index 8293448..5c28eaf 100644 (file)
--- a/gcc/loop-unroll.c
+++ b/gcc/loop-unroll.c
@@ -33,7 +33,6 @@ Software Foundation, 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA
 #include "expr.h"
 #include "hashtab.h"
 #include "recog.h"    
-#include "varray.h"                        
 
 /* This pass performs loop unrolling and peeling.  We only perform these
    optimizations on innermost loops (with single exception) because
@@ -85,9 +84,6 @@ struct iv_to_split
                           XEXP (XEXP (single_set, loc[0]), loc[1]).  */ 
 };
 
-DEF_VEC_P(rtx);
-DEF_VEC_ALLOC_P(rtx,heap);
-
 /* Information about accumulators to expand.  */
 
 struct var_to_expand
@@ -508,7 +504,7 @@ peel_loop_completely (struct loops *loops, struct loop *loop)
       if (desc->noloop_assumptions)
        RESET_BIT (wont_exit, 1);
 
-      remove_edges = xcalloc (npeel, sizeof (edge));
+      remove_edges = XCNEWVEC (edge, npeel);
       n_remove_edges = 0;
 
       if (flag_split_ivs_in_unroller)
@@ -693,7 +689,7 @@ unroll_loop_constant_iterations (struct loops *loops, struct loop *loop)
   wont_exit = sbitmap_alloc (max_unroll + 1);
   sbitmap_ones (wont_exit);
 
-  remove_edges = xcalloc (max_unroll + exit_mod + 1, sizeof (edge));
+  remove_edges = XCNEWVEC (edge, max_unroll + exit_mod + 1);
   n_remove_edges = 0;
   if (flag_split_ivs_in_unroller 
       || flag_variable_expansion_in_unroller)
@@ -965,7 +961,7 @@ unroll_loop_runtime_iterations (struct loops *loops, struct loop *loop)
     opt_info = analyze_insns_in_loop (loop);
   
   /* Remember blocks whose dominators will have to be updated.  */
-  dom_bbs = xcalloc (n_basic_blocks, sizeof (basic_block));
+  dom_bbs = XCNEWVEC (basic_block, n_basic_blocks);
   n_dom_bbs = 0;
 
   body = get_loop_body (loop);
@@ -1023,7 +1019,7 @@ unroll_loop_runtime_iterations (struct loops *loops, struct loop *loop)
   /* Precondition the loop.  */
   loop_split_edge_with (loop_preheader_edge (loop), init_code);
 
-  remove_edges = xcalloc (max_unroll + n_peel + 1, sizeof (edge));
+  remove_edges = XCNEWVEC (edge, max_unroll + n_peel + 1);
   n_remove_edges = 0;
 
   wont_exit = sbitmap_alloc (max_unroll + 2);
@@ -1168,6 +1164,9 @@ unroll_loop_runtime_iterations (struct loops *loops, struct loop *loop)
             ";; Unrolled loop %d times, counting # of iterations "
             "in runtime, %i insns\n",
             max_unroll, num_loop_insns (loop));
+
+  if (dom_bbs)
+    free (dom_bbs);
 }
 
 /* Decide whether to simply peel LOOP and how much.  */
@@ -1574,7 +1573,19 @@ analyze_insn_to_expand_var (struct loop *loop, rtx insn)
       && GET_CODE (src) != MINUS
       && GET_CODE (src) != MULT)
     return NULL;
-  
+
+  /* Hmm, this is a bit paradoxical.  We know that INSN is a valid insn
+     in MD.  But if there is no optab to generate the insn, we can not
+     perform the variable expansion.  This can happen if an MD provides
+     an insn but not a named pattern to generate it, for example to avoid
+     producing code that needs additional mode switches like for x87/mmx.
+
+     So we check have_insn_for which looks for an optab for the operation
+     in SRC.  If it doesn't exist, we can't perform the expansion even
+     though INSN is valid.  */
+  if (!have_insn_for (GET_CODE (src), GET_MODE (src)))
+    return NULL;
+
   if (!XEXP (src, 0))
     return NULL;
   
@@ -1602,7 +1613,7 @@ analyze_insn_to_expand_var (struct loop *loop, rtx insn)
     return NULL;
   
   /* Record the accumulator to expand.  */
-  ves = xmalloc (sizeof (struct var_to_expand));
+  ves = XNEW (struct var_to_expand);
   ves->insn = insn;
   ves->var_expansions = VEC_alloc (rtx, heap, 1);
   ves->reg = copy_rtx (dest);
@@ -1658,15 +1669,25 @@ analyze_iv_to_split_insn (rtx insn)
   if (!biv_p (insn, dest))
     return NULL;
 
-  ok = iv_analyze (insn, dest, &iv);
-  gcc_assert (ok);
+  ok = iv_analyze_result (insn, dest, &iv);
+
+  /* This used to be an assert under the assumption that if biv_p returns
+     true that iv_analyze_result must also return true.  However, that
+     assumption is not strictly correct as evidenced by pr25569.
+
+     Returning NULL when iv_analyze_result returns false is safe and
+     avoids the problems in pr25569 until the iv_analyze_* routines
+     can be fixed, which is apparently hard and time consuming
+     according to their author.  */
+  if (! ok)
+    return NULL;
 
   if (iv.step == const0_rtx
       || iv.mode != iv.extend_mode)
     return NULL;
 
   /* Record the insn to split.  */
-  ivts = xmalloc (sizeof (struct iv_to_split));
+  ivts = XNEW (struct iv_to_split);
   ivts->insn = insn;
   ivts->base_var = NULL_RTX;
   ivts->step = iv.step;
@@ -1686,7 +1707,7 @@ analyze_insns_in_loop (struct loop *loop)
 {
   basic_block *body, bb;
   unsigned i, num_edges = 0;
-  struct opt_info *opt_info = xcalloc (1, sizeof (struct opt_info));
+  struct opt_info *opt_info = XCNEW (struct opt_info);
   rtx insn;
   struct iv_to_split *ivts = NULL;
   struct var_to_expand *ves = NULL;
@@ -2106,9 +2127,8 @@ apply_opt_in_copies (struct opt_info *opt_info,
               
               if (ivts)
                 {
-#ifdef ENABLE_CHECKING
-                 gcc_assert (rtx_equal_p (PATTERN (insn), PATTERN (orig_insn)));
-#endif
+                 gcc_assert (GET_CODE (PATTERN (insn))
+                             == GET_CODE (PATTERN (orig_insn)));
                   
                   if (!delta)
                     insert_base_initialization (ivts, insn);
@@ -2121,9 +2141,8 @@ apply_opt_in_copies (struct opt_info *opt_info,
               ves = htab_find (opt_info->insns_with_var_to_expand, &ve_templ);
               if (ves)
                 { 
-#ifdef ENABLE_CHECKING
-                  gcc_assert (rtx_equal_p (PATTERN (insn), PATTERN (orig_insn)));
-#endif
+                 gcc_assert (GET_CODE (PATTERN (insn))
+                             == GET_CODE (PATTERN (orig_insn)));
                   expand_var_during_unrolling (ves, insn);
                 }
             }