This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa] New regressions as of 2003-11-04
> >> >>Lots of changes yesterday produced new regressions in C, C++, Fortran
> >> >>and mudflap. I think I know what the mudflap problem is, so I'll take
> >> >>care of that. Could you folks take a look at the new regressions and
> >> >>see if they're related to your changes?
> >> >> FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/20030814-4.c scan-tree-dump-times set = -1 0
> >> >> FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/20030814-5.c scan-tree-dump-times set = -1 0
> >> >OK. After looking at these some more. These are failures that are a
> >> >combination of the COND_EXPR lowering and some sillyness in PRE.
> >this patch adds a cfg-aware version of remove_useless_..., thus fixing
> >these failures.
> > * basic-block.h (create_bb): Declaration changed.
> > * tree-cfg.c (create_bb): Enable creating a block on specified place.
> > (make_blocks, tree_split_edge, tree_make_forwarder_block): Use it.
> > (tree_verify_flow_info): Check bbs are in the correct order.
> > (cfg_remove_useless_stmts_bb, cfg_remove_useless_stmts): New.
> > (remove_unreachable_blocks): Remove missleading comments.
> > * tree-flow.h (cfg_remove_useless_stmts): Declare.
> > * tree-ssa.c (rewrite_out_of_ssa): Use cfg_remove_useless_stmts instead
> > of remove_useless_stmts_and_vars.
> So, has the cfg_remove_useless_stmts_bb code actually been bootstrapped and
> regression tested?
> I installed your latest version in my local tree and it clearly regresses on
> the GCC testsuite (doesn't correctly handle nonlocal gotos/abnormal edges)
> and it may also be causing a mis-compilation of libjava.
I have bootstrapped and regtested it on x86_64. There were no new
regressions in c and c++ testsuites. Libjava did not build, failing
with a 'gimplification failed' error. I have posted the patch anyway,
hoping that the clearly unrelated failure in libjava is fixed soon so
that I am able to finish the testing.