This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa] Another DFA fix
- From: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>
- To: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- Cc: "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: 08 May 2003 07:24:30 -0400
- Subject: Re: [tree-ssa] Another DFA fix
- Organization: Red Hat Canada
- References: <200305080720.h487KinV013487@speedy.slc.redhat.com>
On Thu, 2003-05-08 at 03:20, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> >2- An ADDR_EXPR is not really a load of the expression it references.
> >It merely takes its address, so making it an operand does not really
> >make sense.
> Right. This can be modeled pretty easily if we care enough. In the
> find_vars_r code we just need the concept of loads explicitly handled
> like we do for stores. We'd then clear is_load and is_store when we
> encountered an ADDR_EXPR. That way we're record it as a variable, but
> the address expression wouldn't create any loads or stores.
Could work. Anything that lets us express the same M_ADDRESSOF
attribute, that I stupidly didn't move into the new rewriting form, is
OK with me.