This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [Java] PATCH for optimization/12547
- From: Jeff Sturm <jsturm at one-point dot com>
- To: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>, <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 10:41:50 -0500 (EST)
- Subject: Re: [Java] PATCH for optimization/12547
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Jason Merrill wrote:
> This bug on the tree-ssa branch turned out to be an unsharing problem.
> jsturm had removed java_tree_inlining_walk_subtrees as part of his work on
> Java gimplification; as a result, the unsharing pass wasn't walking into
> BLOCKs, so it wasn't really doing any unsharing of Java code. The affected
> testcases have shared COND_EXPRs.
Thanks Jason. Sorry for the breakage. I don't remember why I removed
that but I'm sure I had at least a couple of misunderstandings back then:
a) inlining is performed on GENERIC trees, not always GIMPLE.
b) java_tree_inlining_walk_subtrees is used outside of the inliner, in
spite of its name.
walk_tree really ought to come out of tree-inline.c, and Java BLOCK nodes
simply need to die.