This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [RFC][IPA-VRP] Re-factor tree-vrp to factor out common code
- From: Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- To: kugan <kugan dot vivekanandarajah at linaro dot org>
- Cc: "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz>, Martin Jambor <mjambor at suse dot cz>
- Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2016 14:49:26 +0200
- Subject: Re: [RFC][IPA-VRP] Re-factor tree-vrp to factor out common code
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <email@example.com> <57886A2A.firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>
On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 2:27 PM, kugan
> Now that early vrp is moved as part of tree-vrp, there is only minimal
> interface tree-vrp should expose for ipa-vrp. However, I have not found the
> right place to place struct value_range (with GTY marker) and enum
> enum value_range_type is needed in tree-ssanames.[h|c] and in all the places
> where get|set_range_info is used.
> struct value_range is needed in ipa-prop.h, therefore all the places
> ipa-prop.h is included.
> One option is to place it in tree-vrp.h and expose this to GTY
> infrastructure. Then include it in all the places we need any of these
> types. It is in lots of c files.
> I have now placed both in tree.h. Even though that compiles, I am not
> convinced that is the right place.
I'm convinced it is not ;)
As we had value_range_type in tree-ssanames.h why not put value_range there?
Or simply put value_range into tree-vrp.h and leave value_range_type
where it is.
You no longer export vrp_finalize so no need to change it.
> I would appreciate comment/preferences in this regard. I am also attaching
> the current version of this patch for review. I will update it based on the