Re: remaining libjava/verify_local_live_at_start failures

[Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>]

On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 03:18:02PM +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> No, the answer is valid, but the killing of dead code invalidates it.
> Uhm, perhaps I see what is nasty. In case calculate_global_regs_live is
> able to recognize deadness of register set and do not mark live it's arguments
> assuming that the set will be killed later this works.
> The testcase I had in my hands killed dead memory store that goes using
> different channels.  Perhaps only the dead memory store removal code is broken
> and needs reitration (or modification of claculate_global_*)

If *anything* within a single basic block gets different answers
when run multiple times, something is wrong.


r~