This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: minor code-quality regression vs. 2.95
On Thu, Apr 13, 2000 at 12:29:27AM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 04:08:23PM -0500, Clinton Popetz wrote:
> > It's really a pain that we can't depend on lifetime information throughout the
> > compiler. Is there an estimate on how much work it would take to make
> > the scheduler maintain REG_DEAD notes?
>
> I'm fairly certain that commentary is out of date as of
>
> Wed Oct 20 06:26:58 1999 Richard Henderson <rth@cygnus.com>
>
> or so.
Ok, I'll remove this from delete_computation:
#ifdef INSN_SCHEDULING
/* ?!? The schedulers do not keep REG_DEAD notes accurate after
reload has completed. The schedulers need to be fixed. Until
they are, we must not rely on the death notes here. */
if (reload_completed && flag_schedule_insns_after_reload)
{
delete_insn (insn);
return;
}
#endif
and see if we fail regression anywhere.
-Clint