This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: ifcvt/crossjump patch: Fix PR 42496, 21803
- From: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- To: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at adacore dot com>
- Cc: Bernd Schmidt <bernds at codesourcery dot com>, Paolo Bonzini <bonzini at gnu dot org>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Steven Bosscher <stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com>, Jim Wilson <wilson at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 10:52:31 -0600
- Subject: Re: ifcvt/crossjump patch: Fix PR 42496, 21803
- References: <4BB3CCCA.firstname.lastname@example.org> <4C4EA526.email@example.com> <4C4EDEDD.firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>
On 07/27/10 16:28, Eric Botcazou wrote:
While I don't think head merging is a perfect fit for cfgcleanup.c, I
don't think it's worth a huge argument. I'll go along with the final
version (whatever it looks like) in cfgcleanup.c
Yes, I still think that it will be more useful in cfgcleanup.c.
BTW, this is essentially the same thing that's done in the main loop in
ifcvt.c (do you also see it as a kludge there?), where I originally
implemented this optimization, and you were the one who suggested I move
it to cfgcleanup.c. Maybe you misunderstood the optimization back then
and thought it was just CFG manipulation? That's simply not the case;
the analogy with crossjumping doesn't entirely hold.
I think this is the root of the disagreement. I'll keep looking at it.
another form of code commonization so I still think that implementing it using
CFG manipulations is the best approach.
Please run this by another maintainer though.
I'll own reviewing.