This is the mail archive of the 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: [tree-ssa, RFC] CFG transparent RTL expansion

> I beleive they should work fine, but you are inadvertanly creating a
> useless stmt annotation every time modify_stmt() is called within
> bsi_replace, or a routine like that. Presumably mudflap or anything
> between SSA and RTL will manipulate stmts using those routines which
> currently call modify_stmt()... At least I think :-)

I guess I will work this out.

> > > 
> > > - If we don't destroy the CFG, does this mean we are not going to put
> > > the explicit GOTOs back in for fallthru edges which are not immediately
> > > followed by their target label?  Again, a gnawing uncertainty about
> > 
> > This is technical detail.  It seems to me useless to produce it just
> > before expansion, but basically we can go any way.
> > I think with first version I will shoot for keeping the goto like they
> > are now and we can consider removing/not removing it later.
> Yeah, I *expect* that it will become unneccesary to put the GOTOs back
> in, but you are probably right to leave it as is for now.

Yes, I will try to do small steps and describe why I am doing it.  It
would be helpful if you can check the patches and tell me what do you
think about them.

> Andrew

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