This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Question on scalar replacement
- From: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>
- To: Richard Kenner <kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu>
- Cc: "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 15:36:41 -0400
- Subject: Re: Question on scalar replacement
- Organization: Red Hat Canada
- References: <10406131456.AA28426@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>
On Sun, 2004-06-13 at 10:56, Richard Kenner wrote:
> Scalar replacements:
> T.47.P_BOUNDS -> SR.196
> FRAME.64.M12b -> SR.198
> T.47.P_ARRAY -> SR.195
> The first and last seem OK, but there is no assignment to SR.198 in the
> .t32 file but instead, the assignment
> FRAME.64.M12b = system__secondary_stack__ss_mark ();
> from the .t31 file is still present.
Test case? It's as if the main loop in scalarize structures didn't find
any virtual operands on that store. Does -fdump-tree-sra-vops show
virtual operands in that statement? There should be a V_MAY_DEF to
> There is no documenation in the front of tree-sra.c
Every function is documented. But I see that tree-sra.c:tree_sra
contains some outdated stuff. I'll update it.
> (again, I thought that
> such documentation was supposed to be a required criteria for the tree-ssa
And I thought that my repeated calls for documentation review had been
answered. There is a documentation PR for tree-ssa (13756) to which you
never seem to have contributed. We did our best effort to have all the
internals documented before the merge. Feedback we received via mail
and/or PR13756 were replied to. Some things fell through the cracks and
will be fixed as we move along.
I thank you for pointing out missing documentation, but if you saw that
a bunch of documentation was missing, why didn't you stop the merge?
Why didn't you review the documentation before the merge? It's now
post-merge time, so anything that is missing will just have to be
fixed. No need to be whiny about it.
> Also, when is the missing documentation supposed to be added?
When we discover that is missing, of course. If you let me know what
you find difficult to understand in tree-sra.c, I'll happily add more
explanations to the code.