This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa] tree-ssa vs. fold
- From: Jeff Sturm <jsturm at one-point dot com>
- To: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 09:56:21 -0400 (EDT)
- Subject: Re: [tree-ssa] tree-ssa vs. fold
On Sat, 28 Jun 2003, Jason Merrill wrote:
> A GIMPLE binop node can never have side effects; as of my recent change to
> is_gimple_val, a volatile decl will be copied into a temporary.
Oh, I see. I wasn't aware of this change. That does make things a little
easier...
> > * fold-const.c (fold): Don't save_expr unless TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS.
>
> OK.
I've applied this hunk. Thanks.
> > * tree-ssa.c (rewrite_and_optimize_stmt): Check has_volatile_ops
> > before folding.
>
> I don't think this is necessary anymore.
I agree. I bootstrapped again without, just in case. There was no
change.
Jeff