Re: [PATCH] Reduce PHI node by 4/8 bytes

[Diego Novillo <dnovillo at acm dot org>]

Andrew_Pinski@PlayStation.Sony.Com wrote on 04/17/07 22:58:

> OK? Bootstrapped and tested on powerpc64-linux-gnu with no regressions, 
> also cross built to spu-elf and tested with no regressions.

Any idea on how much memory this saved?


>         * tree.h (GIMPLE_TUPLE_P): Also true for PHI_NODEs.
>         (GENERIC_NEXT): New function macro.
>         (PHI_CHAIN): Use phi_node's new chain variable.
>         (tree_phi_node): Change tree_common to tree_base
>         and add the chain field.
>         * tree-phinodes.c (make_phi_node): Don't set
>         TREE_TYPE on the new node.
>         * c-decl.c (lang_tree_node): Use GENERIC_NEXT
>         instead of checking GIMPLE_TUPLE_P in chain_next.
>         * tree-vect-transform.c
>         (get_initial_def_for_induction): Look at
>         PHI_RESULT_TREE for the type of the phi node.
>         (update_vuses_to_preheader): Use PHI_CHAIN
>         instead of TREE_CHAIN on the phi node.
>         * tree-ssa-structalias.c (compute_points_to_sets):
>         Likewise.
>         (ipa_pta_execute): Likewise.
> 
> cp/ChangeLog:
>         * cp-tree.h (lang_tree_node): Use GENERIC_NEXT
>         instead of checking GIMPLE_STMT_P in chain_next.
> 
> ada/ChangeLog:
>         * ada-tree.h (lang_tree_node): Use GENERIC_NEXT
>         instead of checking GIMPLE_STMT_P in chain_next.
> 
> java/ChangeLog:
>         * java-tree.h (lang_tree_node): Use GENERIC_NEXT
>         instead of checking GIMPLE_STMT_P in chain_next.
> 
> fortran/ChangeLog:
>         * f95-lang.c (lang_tree_node): Use GENERIC_NEXT
>         instead of checking GIMPLE_STMT_P in chain_next.

The gimple parts are OK.  The rest looks trivial enough, I guess, unless
an FE maintainer objects.