Re: [patch] PR middle-end/54385

[Steven Bosscher <stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com>]

On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 11:54 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> The CLEANUP_CFG_CHANGED path looks unnecessary, it looks like this is
>> mostly for repairing loops but I don't see a reason for this in
>> postreload (loops have been freed at that point). I could do
>> cleanup_cfg(0) but there shouldn't be much to clean up other than
>> unreachable blocks. I see delete_unreachable_blocks used a lot too.
>> But I have no strong preference either way. Do you think I should use
>> cleanup_cfg instead?
>
> That would be my personal preference, yes.  It was cheap last time I measured
> and I think it's the right abstraction here: if you remove edges from the CFG
> or apply some similar transformation, you need a cleanup_cfg(0) at the end.

Updated patch attached, tested on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu.
This is exactly the same patch as before, except that it now uses
"cleanup_cfg (0)" instead of delete_unreachable_blocks.

OK for trunk?

Ciao!
Steven

Attachment: PR54385.diff
Description: Binary data