This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: SSA_NAMES: should there be an unused, un-free limbo?
On Thu, 2006-12-21 at 14:05 -0500, Diego Novillo wrote:
> In any case, that is not important. I agree that every SSA name in the
> SSA table needs to have a DEF_STMT that is either (a) an empty
> statement, or, (b) a valid statement still present in the IL.
Just to be 100% clear. This is not true at the current time; see the
discussion about the sharing of a single field for TREE_CHAIN and
SSA_NAME_DEF_STMT. If you want to make that statement true, then
you need to fix both the orphan problem and the sharing of a field
for SSA_NAME_DEF_STMT and TREE_CHAIN.
.
>
> Frankly, I'm a bit surprised that we are running into this. I'd like to
> see a test case, if you have one.
I'm not surprised at all. We've never systematically tried to identify
leaks of SSA_NAMEs.
Jeff