[patch] PR56729

[Jeff Law]

On 04/17/2013 02:12 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
>>> It looks like there are places in the middle end that use remove_insn
>>> on insns that are not actually emitted. This breaks the assert I added
>>> in df_insn_delete. The patch disables the assert for now. The comment
>>> before the assert is now even messier than before but I think it's
>>> better to explain why the assert cannot work than to remove the
>>> comment and the assert altogether.
>
> This is no longer necessary, now that remove_insn doesn't use
> df_insn_delete. Only a small patch to lower-subreg.c is needed to
> restore the check.
>
> Bootstrapped&tested (unix{,-m32}) on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu.
> OK for trunk?
>
> Ciao!
> Steven
>
>
>          * lower-subreg.c (resolve_simple_move): If called self-recursive,
>          do not delete_insn insns that have not yet been emitted, only
>          unlink them with remove_insn.
>          * df-scan.c (df_insn_delete): Revert r197492.
OK.
Jeff