This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa] Cleanup and enhance dominator infrastructure
- From: law at redhat dot com
- To: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Zdenek Dvorak <rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz>, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>, Andrew Macleod <amacleod at redhat dot com>, gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz>
- Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 23:13:25 -0700
- Subject: Re: [tree-ssa] Cleanup and enhance dominator infrastructure
- Reply-to: law at redhat dot com
In message <1071785157.7490.11.camel@frodo.toronto.redhat.com>, Diego Novillo w
rites:
>On Thu, 2003-12-18 at 09:37, Zdenek Dvorak wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> > > as pointed out by Daniel, there is a mistake in the part of the patch i
>n
>> > > tree-ssa-pre.c (I did not notice that the arguments of
>> > > fast_a_dominates_b are reversed wrto dominated_by_p).
>> >
>> > Could you send me a complete patch including these new fixes?
>>
>> here is the actual version of the patch; nothing else was changed
>> (except for resolving a few conflicts), so the comments/changelogs at
>> the original message should be applicable.
>
>The new dom children interface is much nicer than before. Thanks. A
>couple of comments below:
>
>In the definition of enum dom_state add a comment specifying that the
>enum values are ordered from "worst" to "best". We use those semantics
>in places like cleanup_control_expr_graph.
>
>> ! #ifdef DEBUG_ET
>>
>Have you bootstrapped with DEBUG_ET enabled?
If it's as slow as Zdenek claims, then we might as well just kill DEBUG_ET.
>> ! static int len;
>> ! static void *datas[100000];
>> ! static int depths[100000];
>>
>Please #define these values and add guards in record_path_before_1.
Err, really? So we're just going to blindly allocate nearly a megabyte
of static data on a 32bit machine? That's lame, really lame. We're better
off getting that much data from the heap via malloc/free.
jeff