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: ifcvt/crossjump patch: Fix PR 42496, 21803


On 07/28/2010 08:25 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
I'm saying that optimizations run in cfgcleanup.c must play by the
rules.
If your "rules" lead to an absurd result, the rules are bogus. Who
decided those "rules" anyway?

I'm not aware of an such rule. I can see the value in placing such rules on cfgcleanup.c's worker bees which is part of the reason why I originally suggested this optimization (if implemented as insn movement) be placed somewhere other than cfgcleanup.

Personally I don't care about how the pass is implemented, I think it fits more in cfgcleanup.c anyway than in if-conversion (because it doesn't remove the conditional execution).


There may be another advantage in putting it in cfgcleanup; using flags to control head-merging may be more suitable than the relatively rigid pass manager.

Paolo


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