[PATCH] Add sequence check to leaf_function_p

[Jeff Law]

On 05/12/2017 10:29 AM, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
> Alexander Monakov wrote:
>> As I understand, we need to ensure that get_insns call retrieves the topmost
>> sequence corresponding to the function body, not any current subsequence that
>> could have been started via start_sequence.  Therefore the 'prolog or epilog'
>> part is a bit misleading, we could be in a subsequence for other reasons, and
>> we need to reject those as well.  So, ...
> 
> It's most likely that if this assert triggers, it is from a prolog or epilog sequence.
> 
>> ... can the comment please be reworded to match the code, if it's necessary to
>> have a comment here at all?  E.g. "Ensure we walk the entire function body after
>> the following get_insns call".
> 
> I've changed to to "Ensure we walk the entire function body."
> 
> Wilco
> 
> 2017-05-11  Wilco Dijkstra  <wdijkstr@arm.com>
> 
> 	* final.c (leaf_function_p): Check we are not in a sequence.
OK.
jeff