[tree-ssa] live analysis on local static functions
Jan Hubicka
jh@suse.cz
Tue Oct 14 20:28:00 GMT 2003
> In message <1066153643.10504.2025.camel@p4>, Andrew MacLeod writes:
> >On Tue, 2003-10-14 at 13:34, law@redhat.com wrote:
> >> In message <1066151692.19104.2006.camel@p4>, Andrew MacLeod writes:
> >> >On Tue, 2003-10-14 at 13:05, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> >> >> On Tue, 2003-10-14 at 13:03, law@redhat.com wrote:
> >> >> > In message <1066149766.10504.1982.camel@p4>, Andrew MacLeod writes:
> >> >>
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >I get out of ssa producing:
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >q ()
> >> >> > >{
> >> >> > > char * <U1244>;
> >> >> > > char * retval.2;
> >> >> > > char * T.1;
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > # BLOCK 0. PRED: -1. SUCC: 1.
> >> >> > > {
> >> >> > > {
> >> >> > > static char * a = (char *)"";
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > # VUSE <a_1>;
> >> >> > > <U1244> = a;
> >> >> > > goto <U11d0>;;
> >> >> > > };
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > # BLOCK 1. PRED: 0. SUCC: 2.
> >> >> > > <U11d0>:;;
> >> >> > > (void)0;
> >> >> > > };
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > # BLOCK 2. PRED: 1. SUCC: -2.
> >> >> > > (void)0;
> >> >> > > return <U1244>;;
> >> >> > >}
> >> >> > >
> >> >>
> >> >> > But it still seems to me that something is missing the fact that "a"
> >> >> > is actually used. If "a" is marked as used, then everything ought to
> >> >> > work as expected.
> >> >>
> >> >> I am currently looking at why the VUSE <a_1> didnt mark 'a' as used.
> >> >>
> >> >INterestingly, the 'a' in the BIND has address
> >> >$7 = (union tree_node *) 0x400b12b8
> >> >and the 'a' used as a base for 'a_1' is:
> >> >$9 = (union tree_node *) 0x400adbc8
> >> >
> >> >so used is set on the one in $9, but never set on the one in $7.
> >> Which explains a whole lot :-)
> >>
> >> >Diego, any idea why we're using a different VAR_DECL?
> >> Probably an artifact of inlining I'd guess. Does either one of them
> >> have DECL_ABSTRACT_ORIGIN set, and if so, what tree does that point to?
> >>
> >
> >nope. both are 0. Oh wait, yeah. the one in the BIND_EXPR does ($7). It
> >points to the one we are using in a_1. (the $9 value)
> Hmmm, that's kind of backwards from what I was expecting. But I guess
> it's not terribly difficult to handle.
>
>
> Once my current cleanups are done testing I'll poke at this and post a patch.
OK, thanks!
BTW with the patch to avoid removal and -funit-at-a-time on by default,
I can get into stage3 but then I get abort in finish_spills :(
Honza
>
> jeff
>
More information about the Gcc
mailing list