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] |
On 04/07/2017 08:02 AM, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
It's certainly be preferable to not change in_lto_p-- unless Richi wants to chime in on the safety of setting in_lto_p earlier.On 2017-04-06 11:12 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:With the likely deprecation in mind, I've only done a cursory review of the changes -- mostly to verify that they hit Cilk+ paths only.What's the purpose behind changing when we set the in_lto_p flag?Without that change, GCC with my patch ICEed with _Cilk_spawn and -flto -O3 -fcilkplus since __cilkrts_stack_frame.ctx's type (array of void *) was not TYPE_STRUCTURAL_EQUALITY_P in lto stage. If this change is not proper, I'll work on modifying my patch to work without touching in_lto_p.
I'm not familiar enough with the LTO interactions to know if movement of in_lto_p is safe.
Jeff
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |