This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Pass manager: add support for termination of pass list
- From: Martin LiÅka <mliska at suse dot cz>
- To: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 11:19:37 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Pass manager: add support for termination of pass list
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <56263B07 dot 1010900 at suse dot cz> <CAFiYyc3PozYWSPEJvbBaQNT=UMhJTFS0nh+4AJsfRjjL2E27RA at mail dot gmail dot com>
On 10/20/2015 03:39 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 3:00 PM, Martin LiÅka <mliska@suse.cz> wrote:
>> Hello.
>>
>> As part of upcoming merge of HSA branch, we would like to have possibility to terminate
>> pass manager after execution of the HSA generation pass. The HSA back-end is implemented
>> as a tree pass that directly emits HSAIL from gimple tree representation. The pass operates
>> on clones created by HSA IPA pass and the pass manager should stop execution of further
>> RTL passes.
>>
>> Suggested patch survives bootstrap and regression tests on x86_64-linux-pc.
>>
>> What do you think about it?
>
> Are you sure it works this way?
>
> Btw, you will miss executing of all the cleanup passes that will
> eventually free memory
> associated with the function. So I'd rather support a
> TODO_discard_function which
> should basically release the body from the cgraph.
Hi.
Agree with you that I should execute all TODOs, which can be easily done.
However, if I just try to introduce the suggested TODO and handle it properly
by calling cgraph_node::release_body, then for instance fn->gimple_df, fn->cfg are
released and I hit ICEs on many places.
Stopping the pass manager looks necessary, or do I miss something?
Thanks,
Martin
>
> Richard.
>
>> Thanks,
>> Martin