[PATCH] VECify record_layout_info.pending_statics

Richard Guenther richard.guenther@gmail.com
Fri Jun 18 09:31:00 GMT 2010


On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 8:51 PM, Nathan Froyd <froydnj@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> As $SUBJECT suggests.  More TREE_LIST removal, yada, yada.
>
> Tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.  OK?

Ok.

Thanks,
Richard.

> -Nathan
>
>        * tree.h (record_layout_info): Change type of pending_statics field
>        to a VEC.
>        * stor-layout.c (start_record_layout): Store NULL into
>        pending_statics.
>        (debug_rli): Adjust for new type of pending_statics field.
>        (place_field): Likewise.
>        (finish_record_layout): Likewise.
>
> --- a/gcc/stor-layout.c
> +++ b/gcc/stor-layout.c
> @@ -743,7 +743,7 @@ start_record_layout (tree t)
>   rli->offset = size_zero_node;
>   rli->bitpos = bitsize_zero_node;
>   rli->prev_field = 0;
> -  rli->pending_statics = 0;
> +  rli->pending_statics = NULL;
>   rli->packed_maybe_necessary = 0;
>   rli->remaining_in_alignment = 0;
>
> @@ -827,10 +827,13 @@ debug_rli (record_layout_info rli)
>   if (rli->packed_maybe_necessary)
>     fprintf (stderr, "packed may be necessary\n");
>
> -  if (rli->pending_statics)
> +  if (!VEC_empty (tree, rli->pending_statics))
>     {
> +      unsigned ix;
> +      tree t;
>       fprintf (stderr, "pending statics:\n");
> -      debug_tree (rli->pending_statics);
> +      for (ix = 0; VEC_iterate (tree, rli->pending_statics, ix, t); ix++)
> +        debug_tree (t);
>     }
>  }
>
> @@ -1041,8 +1044,7 @@ place_field (record_layout_info rli, tree field)
>      it *after* the record is laid out.  */
>   if (TREE_CODE (field) == VAR_DECL)
>     {
> -      rli->pending_statics = tree_cons (NULL_TREE, field,
> -                                       rli->pending_statics);
> +      VEC_safe_push (tree, gc, rli->pending_statics, field);
>       return;
>     }
>
> @@ -1718,15 +1720,15 @@ finish_record_layout (record_layout_info rli, int free_p)
>
>   /* Lay out any static members.  This is done now because their type
>      may use the record's type.  */
> -  while (rli->pending_statics)
> -    {
> -      layout_decl (TREE_VALUE (rli->pending_statics), 0);
> -      rli->pending_statics = TREE_CHAIN (rli->pending_statics);
> -    }
> +  while (!VEC_empty (tree, rli->pending_statics))
> +    layout_decl (VEC_pop (tree, rli->pending_statics), 0);
>
>   /* Clean up.  */
>   if (free_p)
> -    free (rli);
> +    {
> +      VEC_free (tree, gc, rli->pending_statics);
> +      free (rli);
> +    }
>  }
>
>
> --- a/gcc/tree.h
> +++ b/gcc/tree.h
> @@ -4325,7 +4325,7 @@ typedef struct record_layout_info_s
>   tree prev_field;
>   /* The static variables (i.e., class variables, as opposed to
>      instance variables) encountered in T.  */
> -  tree pending_statics;
> +  VEC(tree,gc) *pending_statics;
>   /* Bits remaining in the current alignment group */
>   int remaining_in_alignment;
>   /* True if we've seen a packed field that didn't have normal
>



More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list