This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa] New regressions as of 2003-11-04
- From: law at redhat dot com
- To: Andrew MacLeod <amacleod at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>, Zdenek Dvorak <rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz>, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>, Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>, gcc mailing list <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 15:08:53 -0700
- Subject: Re: [tree-ssa] New regressions as of 2003-11-04
- Reply-to: law at redhat dot com
In message <1067983200.7270.78.camel@p4>, Andrew MacLeod writes:
>On Tue, 2003-11-04 at 16:55, law@redhat.com wrote:
>> In message <1067981299.7039.71.camel@p4>, Andrew MacLeod writes:
>> >Has remove_useless_stmts_and_vars_cond() been modified since/during
>> >lowering?
>> The code to handle this kind of stuff certainly hasn't been changed
>> in any significant way.
>>
>> > it pretty much has to be since there is never anything
>> >actually *IN* the arms now, so it oughta be looking in the target block,
>> >and it wouild pick this up wouldn't it?
>> Right. The only difficulty is you don't have easy access to the
>> target block in that code since your CFG is potentially horked.
>>
>> [ Then again, maybe the lowering changes mean the CFG isn't horked
>> anymore.. I haven't though much about that. ]
>>
>Well, SSA->normal doesn't hork anything... So it should be fine coming
>out of there.
Right, but the remove_useless_stmts_and_vars does kill the CFG.
Jeff