This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH 3/4] Introduce NEXT_PASS_NUM macro
- From: Martin Jambor <mjambor at suse dot cz>
- To: David Malcolm <dmalcolm at redhat dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 20:25:48 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] Introduce NEXT_PASS_NUM macro
- References: <1374110303-9758-1-git-send-email-dmalcolm at redhat dot com> <1374110303-9758-4-git-send-email-dmalcolm at redhat dot com>
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 09:18:22PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
> gcc/
>
> Explicitly number the instances of passes within passes.def.
>
> This is needed by a subsequent patch so that we can create
> fields within the pipeline class for each pass instance (to help
> locate pass instances when debugging).
>
I don't really understand what you want to achieve. Are you sure the
benefits are worth the work necessary to implement the processing of
passes.def.in? Especially given that we already initialize
static_pass_number at run time and copy stuff around in
make_pass_instance when it is already set. I assume this would
somehow allow us to directly dump data of say forwprop3 as apposed to
forwprop2 to but that would require constant awareness of the sequence
number of the currently running pass, which I think is also unpleasant
and error-prone.
I mean, you may have perfectly legitimate reasons for doing this, I'm
just wondering whether we are perhaps over-engineering this a bit.
Thanks,
Martin