This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[PATCH] Handle COND_EXPR/VEC_COND_EXPR in walk_stmt_load_store_addr_ops and ssa verification
- From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- To: Richard Guenther <rguenther at suse dot de>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gmail dot com>
- Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 15:29:52 +0200
- Subject: [PATCH] Handle COND_EXPR/VEC_COND_EXPR in walk_stmt_load_store_addr_ops and ssa verification
- Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
Hi!
Andrew mentioned on IRC he found walk_stmt_load_store_addr_ops
doesn't handle COND_EXPR weirdo first argument well, the following
patch is an attempt to handle that.
I've noticed similar spot in verify_ssa, though in that case I'm not
sure about whether the change is so desirable, as it doesn't seem to
handle SSA_NAMEs embedded in MEM_EXPRs, ARRAY_REFs etc. either.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk?
Or just the gimple.c part?
2011-10-13 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
* gimple.c (walk_stmt_load_store_addr_ops): Call visit_addr
also on COND_EXPR/VEC_COND_EXPR comparison operands if they are
ADDR_EXPRs.
* tree-ssa.c (verify_ssa): For COND_EXPR/VEC_COND_EXPR count
SSA_NAMEs in comparison operand as well.
--- gcc/gimple.c.jj 2011-10-13 11:13:39.000000000 +0200
+++ gcc/gimple.c 2011-10-13 11:15:25.000000000 +0200
@@ -5313,9 +5313,24 @@ walk_stmt_load_store_addr_ops (gimple st
|| gimple_code (stmt) == GIMPLE_COND))
{
for (i = 0; i < gimple_num_ops (stmt); ++i)
- if (gimple_op (stmt, i)
- && TREE_CODE (gimple_op (stmt, i)) == ADDR_EXPR)
- ret |= visit_addr (stmt, TREE_OPERAND (gimple_op (stmt, i), 0), data);
+ {
+ tree op = gimple_op (stmt, i);
+ if (op == NULL_TREE)
+ ;
+ else if (TREE_CODE (op) == ADDR_EXPR)
+ ret |= visit_addr (stmt, TREE_OPERAND (op, 0), data);
+ /* COND_EXPR and VCOND_EXPR rhs1 argument is a comparison
+ tree with two operands. */
+ else if (i == 1 && COMPARISON_CLASS_P (op))
+ {
+ if (TREE_CODE (TREE_OPERAND (op, 0)) == ADDR_EXPR)
+ ret |= visit_addr (stmt, TREE_OPERAND (TREE_OPERAND (op, 0),
+ 0), data);
+ if (TREE_CODE (TREE_OPERAND (op, 1)) == ADDR_EXPR)
+ ret |= visit_addr (stmt, TREE_OPERAND (TREE_OPERAND (op, 1),
+ 0), data);
+ }
+ }
}
else if (is_gimple_call (stmt))
{
--- gcc/tree-ssa.c.jj 2011-10-07 10:03:28.000000000 +0200
+++ gcc/tree-ssa.c 2011-10-13 11:19:30.000000000 +0200
@@ -1069,14 +1069,27 @@ verify_ssa (bool check_modified_stmt)
for (i = 0; i < gimple_num_ops (stmt); i++)
{
op = gimple_op (stmt, i);
- if (op && TREE_CODE (op) == SSA_NAME && --count < 0)
+ if (op == NULL_TREE)
+ continue;
+ if (TREE_CODE (op) == SSA_NAME)
+ --count;
+ /* COND_EXPR and VCOND_EXPR rhs1 argument is a comparison
+ tree with two operands. */
+ else if (i == 1 && COMPARISON_CLASS_P (op))
{
- error ("number of operands and imm-links don%'t agree"
- " in statement");
- print_gimple_stmt (stderr, stmt, 0, TDF_VOPS|TDF_MEMSYMS);
- goto err;
+ if (TREE_CODE (TREE_OPERAND (op, 0)) == SSA_NAME)
+ --count;
+ if (TREE_CODE (TREE_OPERAND (op, 1)) == SSA_NAME)
+ --count;
}
}
+ if (count < 0)
+ {
+ error ("number of operands and imm-links don%'t agree"
+ " in statement");
+ print_gimple_stmt (stderr, stmt, 0, TDF_VOPS|TDF_MEMSYMS);
+ goto err;
+ }
FOR_EACH_SSA_USE_OPERAND (use_p, stmt, iter, SSA_OP_USE|SSA_OP_VUSE)
{
Jakub