Re: RFC: kill od flow_delete_insns

[Daniel Berlin <dan at cgsoftware dot com>]

Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com> writes:

> On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 05:41:18PM +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > I am attempting to amn flow_delete_insn and use delete_insn everywhere.
>> To do it, I need to kill the aggresive code removal it have (and keep it
>> for the cfg_cleanup, that IMO makes more sense too).
>
> Why that way instead of removing delete_insn in preference to
> flow_delete_insn?

Well, it's not always correct, because it doesn't just mark the insn
deleted.
Because it patches it out, it can screw the basic block boundaries,
and you can end up with a basic block note as the end of a basic
block.

>
>> What I am affraid of is reorg pass and machine depdendent reorg.  Will
>> they stay happy with this change?
>
> They can live with not deleting dependant expressions.  What we
> do have to be careful about is that we may have an invalid CFG
> at this point.
>
>
> r~

-- 
"Under my bed I have shoe box full of telephone rings.  Whenever
I get lonely I open it up just a bit and I get a call.  One time
I dropped the box all over the floor and the phone wouldn't stop
ringing, so I had it disconnected.  I bought a new phone though.
I didn't have much money so I had to buy an irregular phone --
it had no number 5 on it.  I saw a close friend of mine the
other day...  He said, "Steven, why haven't you called me?"  I
said, "I can't call everyone I want.  My new phone has no five
on it."  He said, "How long have you had it?"  I said, "I don't
know...  My calendar has no sevens on it."
"-Steven Wright