This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: needless deep recursion in gt-c-decl.h

From: Per Bothner <per at bothner dot com>
To: Geoff Keating <geoffk at redhat dot com>
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2002 10:13:18 -0700
Subject: Re: needless deep recursion in gt-c-decl.h
References: <3D3E1AFA.2010707@bothner.com> <200207240443.g6O4hx418758@desire.geoffk.org> <3D3E34F6.7060805@bothner.com> <200207240529.g6O5Thw18855@desire.geoffk.org> <3D3E47C0.5020100@bothner.com> <200207242151.g6OLp7W19902@desire.geoffk.org> <3D401801.3050609@bothner.com> <200207251825.g6PIPDf21554@desire.geoffk.org> <3D408B37.6090208@bothner.com> <200207302314.g6UNEab06587@desire.geoffk.org> <3D473258.60804@bothner.com> <200208011932.g71JWIN10977@desire.geoffk.org>

Geoff Keating wrote:

Nearly all of the remainder is still recursion on PREV_INSN fields.
This happens because the DECL_RTL of a LABEL_REF will refer to a
CODE_LABEL in the middle of the insn chain, and it happens that this
is the first place the insn chain is encountered when marking.  The
label involved is "plus_expr:" in expand_expr, line 7632.
expand_expr starts at line 6183, so there's a long way to go back.

Is there any reason to mark the DECL_RTL of a LABEL_REF?  Is there any
case (baring a serious internal compiler error) where the DECL_RTL
could possibly be the only reference to an insn?  If not, why waste
time (and stack space) marking it?
--
	--Per Bothner
per@bothner.com   http://www.bothner.com/per/

Follow-Ups:
- Re: needless deep recursion in gt-c-decl.h
  - From: Geoff Keating

References:
- Re: needless deep recursion in gt-c-decl.h
  - From: Geoff Keating

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]