This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Non-call exceptions versus cse


    Well, AFAICS the code in question scans backwards one insn and tries
    to replace an operand in the current insn.  It doesn't scan any
    further than that.

OK, I missed the point that you were patching: the ChangeLog entry
misled me.

    I would be quite happy simply to check if the previous insn
    may_trap_p(), in which case we shouldn't do the replacement.  My
    previous attempt at a patch did that...

I think both are needed: you set a flag if you cross an EH (but not just
a block) boundary and you test that flag if the insn may trap.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]