This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: O0 cleanup_cfg vs debuggability
James E Wilson wrote:
> Sorry, I got the two ACT debug problems confused.
No problem. I'm following the other one too, and we're very happy to get
such constructive feedback.
> Yours is the one with the missing break, not the missing type/variable debug
> info.
Right.
> It would be nice if there was a way to distinguish between forwarder
> blocks emitted by the compiler and ones that represent actual code. Not
> clear how to do that though, and I'm not sure if it is even possible.
> Maybe we can keep track of when a block is created, and one created at
> RTL gen time represents real code, and one created later represents a
> compiler generated construct. That doesn't seem very elegant though.
Isn't that a bit of overkill just to indirectly influence some optimization
pass in a non optimizing compilation anyway ?
> A new CLEANUP_* enum would be a reasonable solution once you figure out
> how to fix this.
I can look into this, although that might take some time. Especially if
you're not sure it's even possible :)
I'm not clear why a mere inhibition of the edge forwarding optimization in
non-optimizing compilations doesn't seem to be an option.
Could you please enlighten ?
Thanks again for your feedback,
Olivier