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: Redundant check for prologue_epilogue_contains in init_alias_analysis?

From: Jim Wilson <wilson at tuliptree dot org>
To: Zdenek Dvorak <rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz>
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 18:58:52 -0700
Subject: Re: Redundant check for prologue_epilogue_contains in init_alias_analysis?
References: <20030906170936.GA4648@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>

Zdenek Dvorak wrote:

the following check in init_alias_analysis seems partially redundant,
partially wrong to me:

In many cases like this, the best answer is to look at the historical info. We have 6 years of CVS and mailing list logs. It isn't hard to find that the patch came from here http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/1999-08n/msg00048.html and this message also explains why the patch is there.

For those that don't click through, the answer is that the FP won't be considered a constant base pointer if we process prologue/epilogue insns. There are other ways to handle this problem without ignoring all prologue/epilogue instructions. -- Jim Wilson, GNU Tools Support, http://www.SpecifixInc.com

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Redundant check for prologue_epilogue_contains in init_alias_analysis?
  - From: Zdenek Dvorak

References:
- Redundant check for prologue_epilogue_contains in init_alias_analysis?
  - From: Zdenek Dvorak

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