This is the mail archive of the egcs@egcs.cygnus.com mailing list for the EGCS project. See the EGCS home page for more information.
> I pondered about this situation but cannot think of a case where it > would be a problem. OK, I may generate a spurious autoincrement for > an insn that may be dead but the lifetime analysis pass will then > delete it. If you have some testcases that I can try, please send > them. The problem is that it might create a spurious autoincrement where either the memory load or the incremented address (but not both) are dead. flow won't delete that autoincrement then. I don't have a specific testcase; there's probably a testcase somewhere in gcc or the libraries, but I don't know where.