This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org 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: [PATCH][RFC] Fix PR54824, deal with BBs with no successor

From: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at adacore dot com>
To: Richard Biener <rguenther at suse dot de>
Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, Steven Bosscher <stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com>, Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot de>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 16:00:58 +0200
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] Fix PR54824, deal with BBs with no successor
References: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1210241617530.4063@zhemvz.fhfr.qr> <alpine.LNX.2.00.1210251430160.4063@zhemvz.fhfr.qr> <alpine.LNX.2.00.1210251534030.4063@zhemvz.fhfr.qr>

> +       /* If we have a basic-block with no successors that does not
> + 	 end with a control statement or a noreturn call connect it
> + 	 to itself.  This situation can occur when inlining a noreturn
> + 	 call that does in fact return.  */

The '-' is superfluous in basic-block.  And the comment seems to be outdated.

-- 
Eric Botcazou

References:
- [PATCH][RFC] Fix PR54824, deal with BBs with no successor
  - From: Richard Biener
- Re: [PATCH][RFC] Fix PR54824, deal with BBs with no successor
  - From: Richard Biener
- Re: [PATCH][RFC] Fix PR54824, deal with BBs with no successor
  - From: Richard Biener

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