This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Trust TREE_ADDRESSABLE
- From: Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz>
- To: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at adacore dot com>
- Cc: Richard Biener <rguenther at suse dot de>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Steven Bosscher <stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com>, Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz>
- Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2014 21:00:39 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Trust TREE_ADDRESSABLE
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <alpine dot LSU dot 2 dot 11 dot 1406041546210 dot 2632 at zhemvz dot fhfr dot qr> <2053423 dot yWNhKyhJt6 at polaris> <8135c9fc-c00c-41d2-aa59-61b3efa0ffbf at email dot android dot com> <3434379 dot On1yVBOTF4 at polaris>
> > ... In this particular translation unit you mean?
>
> Yes, in the translation unit being processed.
>
> > That would be worthless information for decls also reachable from elsewhere.
>
> It's the information: ADDR_EXPR of this DECL is taken somewhere in the IL,
> it's no more or not less worthless than any other information.
Information whether ADDR_EXPR exists on DECL is actually more accurately mainted
by ipa-ref code (that is also used to drop TREE_ADDRSSABLE on static vars).
Having information whether source language permits taking address of a given object
is more useful.
>
> > So - let's say history is something of the past?
>
> Maybe, but it's an annoying precedent: no clear explanation for the change, no
> testcase and no audit of the affected front-ends (all I guess). That should
> really have been discussed beforehand.
It is my fault here - I alwasy interpreted TREE_ADDRESSABLE this way and it seems
to work for C/C++ that are the frontends I usually look into. Sorry for that.
Honza
>
> --
> Eric Botcazou