Re: [patch] The remainder of tree-flow.h refactored.

[Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>]

On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 1:31 AM, Andrew MacLeod <amacleod@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 10/08/2013 07:44 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
>>
>> On 10/08/2013 06:22 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>>
>>> graphite.h should be unnecessary with moving the pass struct like you
>>> did for other loop opts.  Likewise tree-parloops.h (well, ok, maybe
>>> you need parallelized_function_p, even though it's implementation is
>>> gross ;)).  Likewise tree-predcom.h.
>>
>>
>> fair enough.  Yes, I've already seen a few things that madfe my skin crawl
>> and I had to resist going down a  rathole for :-)
>>>
>>>
>>> unvisit_body isn't generic enough to warrant moving out of gimplify.c
>>> (the only user).
>>>
>>> The force_gimple_operand_gsi... routines are in gimplify.c because they
>>> ...
>>> gimplify!  And you moved them but not force_gimple_operand[_1]!?
>>
>>
>> OK, let me make the above adjustments, and I'll recreate a patch without
>> the gimple/gimplfy parts, and re-address that separately. I forget the
>> details of my include issues there at the moment.
>
>
> Here's the adjusted patch which doesn't contain the ugly gimple, gimplify,
> and tree stuff.  I'll deal with that once everything else settles.
> I removed tree-predcom.h and graphite.h and also moved the parallel_loops
> pass into tree-parloops.c... but we still need predcom.h :-P.  oh well. I
> think most of its pretty straightforward.
>
> Bootstraps on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, and running regressions. Assuming no
> issues, OK?

Ok.

Thanks,
Richard.

> Andrew
>
>