This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Get rid of NOTE_LINE_NUMBER infrastructure


Sorry if this has been reported before, but...

Jan Hubicka <jh@suse.cz> writes:
> *************** print_rtl (FILE *outf, rtx rtx_first)
> *** 744,751 ****
>         case CODE_LABEL:
>         case BARRIER:
>   	for (tmp_rtx = rtx_first; tmp_rtx != 0; tmp_rtx = NEXT_INSN (tmp_rtx))
> ! 	  if (! flag_dump_unnumbered
> ! 	      || !NOTE_P (tmp_rtx) || NOTE_LINE_NUMBER (tmp_rtx) < 0)
>   	    {
>   	      fputs (print_rtx_head, outfile);
>   	      print_rtx (tmp_rtx);
> --- 725,731 ----
>         case CODE_LABEL:
>         case BARRIER:
>   	for (tmp_rtx = rtx_first; tmp_rtx != 0; tmp_rtx = NEXT_INSN (tmp_rtx))
> ! 	  if (! flag_dump_unnumbered)
>   	    {
>   	      fputs (print_rtx_head, outfile);
>   	      print_rtx (tmp_rtx);

...it looks like you checked in something else:

[...]
@@ -743,14 +722,6 @@ print_rtl (FILE *outf, rtx rtx_first)
       case NOTE:
       case CODE_LABEL:
       case BARRIER:
-	for (tmp_rtx = rtx_first; tmp_rtx != 0; tmp_rtx = NEXT_INSN (tmp_rtx))
-	  if (! flag_dump_unnumbered
-	      || !NOTE_P (tmp_rtx) || NOTE_LINE_NUMBER (tmp_rtx) < 0)
-	    {
-	      fputs (print_rtx_head, outfile);
-	      print_rtx (tmp_rtx);
-	      fprintf (outfile, "\n");
-	    }
 	break;
 
       default:
[...]

This makes print_rtl a no-op in most cases.

Richard


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]