[PATCH 02/10] tree-object-size: Abstract object_sizes array

Jakub Jelinek jakub@redhat.com
Fri Nov 19 16:18:10 GMT 2021


On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 12:31:28AM +0530, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> Put all accesses to object_sizes behind functions so that we can add
> dynamic capability more easily.
> 
> gcc/ChangeLog:
> 
> 	* tree-object-size.c (object_sizes_grow, object_sizes_release,
> 	object_sizes_unknown_p, object_sizes_get, object_size_set_force,
> 	object_sizes_set): New functions.
> 	(addr_object_size, compute_builtin_object_size,
> 	expr_object_size, call_object_size, unknown_object_size,
> 	merge_object_sizes, plus_stmt_object_size,
> 	cond_expr_object_size, collect_object_sizes_for,
> 	check_for_plus_in_loops_1, init_object_sizes,
> 	fini_object_sizes): Adjust.

> @@ -975,8 +994,9 @@ collect_object_sizes_for (struct object_size_info *osi, tree var)
>      {
>        if (bitmap_set_bit (osi->visited, varno))
>  	{
> -	  object_sizes[object_size_type][varno]
> -	    = (object_size_type & 2) ? -1 : 0;
> +	  /* Initialize to 0 for maximum size and M1U for minimum size so that
> +	     it gets immediately overridden.  */
	  object_sizes_set_force (osi, varno, unknown (object_size_type ^ 2));

Shouldn't that be			      unknown (object_size_type
						       ^ OST_MINIMUM)
?
Or, if you redo the series, update the first patch so that it doesn't leave
any & 2 or & 1 etc. around and instead uses the enumerators and redo this
patch?

Otherwise LGTM.

	Jakub



More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list