This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: gimple build interface
- From: David Malcolm <dmalcolm at redhat dot com>
- To: Andrew MacLeod <amacleod at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>, gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Diego Novillo <dnovillo at google dot com>
- Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 13:05:44 -0400
- Subject: Re: gimple build interface
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <523AFAFE dot 7020808 at redhat dot com> <523B2CC4 dot 6050007 at redhat dot com> <CAFiYyc1rtTFENNw70h-MELX7oGK72AfUHd4SRg-_xU9Vx5soag at mail dot gmail dot com> <52406A83 dot 3000906 at redhat dot com>
On Mon, 2013-09-23 at 12:21 -0400, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> On 09/20/2013 04:08 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Andrew MacLeod <email@example.com> wrote:
> >> On 09/19/2013 09:24 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> >>> I think this is of most use to ssa passes that need to construct code
> >>> snippets, so I propose we make this ssa specific and put it in tree-ssa.c
> >>> (renaming it ssa_build_assign), *OR* we could leave it general purpose and
> >>> put it in its own set of files, gimple-ssa-build.[ch] or something that
> >>> crosses the border between the two representations.
> >>> I'd also suggest that the final optional parameter be changed to tree *lhs
> >>> = NULL_TREE, which would allow the caller to specify the LHS if they want,
> >>> otherwise make_ssa_name would be called. If we want to leave it supporting
> >>> both gimple and ssa, then anyone from gimple land could pass in a gimple LHS
> >>> variable thus avoiding the call to make_ssa_name....
> >>> Thoughts?
> >>> Andrew
> >> Anyway, here is a patch which does that and a bit more. I didn't rename
> >> build_assign() to ssa_build_assign().. even though those are the only kind
> >> actually created right now. we can leave that for the day someone actually
> >> decides to flush this interface out, and maybe we'll want to pass in
> >> gimple_tmps and call them from front ends or other places... then it would
> >> have to be renamed again. So I just left it as is for the moment, but that
> >> could be changed.
> >> I also moved gimple_replace_lhs() to tree-ssa.c and renamed it
> >> ssa_replace_lhs(). It calls insert_debug_temp_for_var_def() from tree-ssa.c
> >> and that only works with the immediate use operands.. so that is an SSA
> >> specific routine, which makes this one SSA specific as well.
> >> Those 2 changes allow tree-ssa.h to no longer be included, it is replaced
> >> with tree-flow.h. Some preliminary work to enable removing immediate use
> >> routines out of tree-flow.h include:
> >> struct count_ptr_d, count_ptr_derefs(), count_uses_and_derefs() also get
> >> moved to tree-ssa.c since those are also require the immediate use
> >> mechanism, and thus is also SSA dependent.
> >> This bootstraps on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu and has no new regressions.
> >> OK?
> > Can you move the builders to asan.c please? From a quick glance it seems
> > to have various issues so it shouldn't be used (I wonder who approved them
> > in the end ... maybe it was even me).
> > ssa_replace_lhs sounds odd (a 'SSA' has a lhs?), but maybe it's just me.
> > I'd have chosen gimple_replace_ssa_lhs?
> That sounds better. done.
> And I also think a seperate file for those builders is probably best...
> here's a patch with those changes.. New files called
> gimple-builder.[ch]... Then diego can eventually do whatever his
> grand vision for them is. I minimized the includes.
> bootstraps and rerunning tests. OK?
Did you forget to attach the patch?