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: [4.2 only] RFA: PR 33848: reload rematerialisation of labels

> But that's the whole idea.  There should be no cases in which register
> allocation (viewed as a black box) changes the JUMP_LABEL.

What do you mean by 'should'?  'Cannot but I'm not sure', 'Cannot modulo 
bugs'?  Because Andrew's change precisely does that and was OKed by RTH.

> I'm struggling to understand what your objection is.

My objection is that your patch is not the minimal one to fix the problem.
More specifically, I don't see the need for changing the code when the jump 
has no JUMP_LABEL.

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