blob: a6c8c8fd34a1ac4beaf1d931945311f7ace72d5d (
plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
|
/* A test for strength reduction and induction variable elimination. */
/* { dg-do compile } */
/* { dg-options "-O1 -fdump-tree-optimized" } */
/* { dg-require-effective-target size32plus } */
/* Size of this structure should be sufficiently weird so that no memory
addressing mode applies. */
struct bla
{
char x[187];
int y;
char z[253];
} arr_base[100];
int foo(void);
void xxx(void)
{
int iter;
for (iter = 0; iter < 100; iter++)
arr_base[iter].y = foo ();
}
/* Access to arr_base[iter].y should be strength reduced. Depending on
whether we have an addressing mode of type [base + offset], one of the
following forms might get chosen:
-- induction variable with base &arr_base[0].y, the memory access of
form *iv = ...
-- induction variable with base 0, the memory access of form
*(iv + &arr_base[0].y) = ...
In any case, we should not have any multiplication. */
/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times " \\* \[^\\n\\r\]*=" 0 "optimized" } } */
/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "\[^\\n\\r\]*= \\* " 0 "optimized" } } */
/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "MEM" 1 "optimized" } } */
/* And the original induction variable should be eliminated. */
/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "iter" 0 "optimized" } } */
/* { dg-final { cleanup-tree-dump "optimized" } } */
|
