This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Trust TREE_ADDRESSABLE
- From: Richard Biener <rguenther at suse dot de>
- To: Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz>
- Cc: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at adacore dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Steven Bosscher <stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2014 11:28:55 +0200 (CEST)
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Trust TREE_ADDRESSABLE
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <alpine dot LSU dot 2 dot 11 dot 1406041546210 dot 2632 at zhemvz dot fhfr dot qr> <10094132 dot LNpDJNWIDH at polaris> <20140611194324 dot GB21180 at kam dot mff dot cuni dot cz> <2989577 dot lx1lXJASQA at polaris> <alpine dot LSU dot 2 dot 11 dot 1406121017580 dot 32404 at zhemvz dot fhfr dot qr> <20140612085009 dot GB6864 at kam dot mff dot cuni dot cz> <alpine dot LSU dot 2 dot 11 dot 1406121115070 dot 32404 at zhemvz dot fhfr dot qr> <20140613040851 dot GD32069 at kam dot mff dot cuni dot cz>
On Fri, 13 Jun 2014, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > When you extract the address and use it. For example when you
> > do auto-parallelization and outline a part of your function it
> > passes arrays as addresses.
> > Or if you start to introduce address induction variables like
> > the vectorizer or IVOPTs does.
> I see, nothing really done by current early/IPA optimizers and in those cases
> we also want to set TREE_ADDRESSABLE bit, too I suppose.
> Do you think I should make patch for setting the NOVOPS bits in ipa code?
No, please don't introduce new users of NOVOPS (it's a quite broken
hack - it's sth like a 'const' function with side-effects so we should
have instead used 'const' and some kind of volatile flag). We're
not using NOVOPS much and that's good (I think handling of such
function calls are somewhat broken).