This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Optimize ASAN_CHECK checks
- From: Dodji Seketeli <dodji at redhat dot com>
- To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Yury Gribov <y dot gribov at samsung dot com>, Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz>, Marek Polacek <polacek at redhat dot com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 13:06:52 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Optimize ASAN_CHECK checks
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20141105093306 dot GB5026 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <5459F3DD dot 8070709 at samsung dot com> <20141105102918 dot GX20462 at redhat dot com> <20141105105020 dot GC5026 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <20141111174234 dot GK5026 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <546325E7 dot 6080005 at samsung dot com> <20141112103416 dot GR5026 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <54634007 dot 1050802 at samsung dot com> <20141112223850 dot GW5026 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <87h9y2owge dot fsf at redhat dot com> <20141114115547 dot GO5026 at tucnak dot redhat dot com>
Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> writes:
>> I am not sure, but I am wondering if we shouldn't save the previous uid
>> of 'stmt' here before setting it, and then restore it before getting out
>> of this function.
>
> No, gimple uids are AFAIK undefined at the start of passes, passes that use
> them are supposed to initialize them before use (new statements created
> during the pass will get 0 there by default), and don't have to clean them
> up anyway at the end of pass.
Yeah, this is what I figured by grepping other passes, but I wasn't sure
:-)
Maybe I should follow up with a doc patch for the (otherwise very terse)
comment of gimple_set_uid and gimple_uid accessors.
Thanks.
--
Dodji