This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa] bnw-simple-branch now usable
- From: Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>
- To: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>,Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>, Ben Elliston <bje at redhat dot com>,"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche at redhat dot com>,Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at codesourcery dot com>,Pop Sébastian <pop at gauvain dot u-strasbg dot fr>,gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 10:35:15 -0400
- Subject: Re: [tree-ssa] bnw-simple-branch now usable
On Thursday, September 12, 2002, at 09:46 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
I hereby announce that the tree simplifier rewrite and new IR are
functional enough to be useful for C. The code bootstraps and
compares,
and AFAICT the only failures in the C testsuite are from missed
optimizations. Now would be a good time for interested folks to check
it
out and help with porting the current crop of tree optimizers to work
on
the new IR.
Unfortunately, I neglected to set a branchpoint tag when I created the
branch, so the only way to get diffs from the branchpoint is via
cvs update -j. One approach would be to run
up "-jbnw-simple-branch:08/28/2002 20:00 GMT" -jbnw-simple-branch
in a checked-out copy of the tree-ssa-20020619-branch. Or just grab
the
patch from
http://people.redhat.com/jason/bnw-simple.patch.bz2
The merge was pretty smooth, and the resulting compiler works well.
I'd
like to go ahead and push this stuff into the tree-ssa branch and get
the
pain out of the way up front, rather than try to deal with optimizers
changing on both branches. What do y'all think?
When you say "optimizers", are you including the tree-dfa and tree-ssa
stuff (IE ref finding and SSA building)?
If not, then at least for SSAPRE, it won't have broken anything.
--Dan