IMA vs tree-ssa

[Mark Mitchell]

Dale Johannesen wrote:

> On Mar 8, 2004, at 2:32 PM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
>
>> Dale Johannesen wrote:
>>
>>> This bit seems to be working, but doesn't solve the entire problem 
>>> by any means.
>>> The tree-based aliasing and structure-scalarizing code also think 
>>> there's only
>>> one copy of a struct type node, and work off pointers.   There may 
>>> be more places
>>> I haven't found yet; can you think of any?  (Most of the SPEC 
>>> failures seem to be
>>> due to aliasing; it thinks different copies of a struct from 
>>> different files do not
>>> alias, when in fact they do.  This breaks lots of things.)
>>>
>> I believe that we should not hold up the tree-ssa merge for IMA.
>>
>> Instead, we should just let IMA be broken for a while.
>
>
> That's a regression.  Just pointing it out.

Yes, I understand, and it's a good point.

I think the right tradeoff is to temporarily sacrifice IMA on the altar 
of tree-ssa, and try to resurrect IMA later.

-- 
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery, LLC
(916) 791-8304
mark@codesourcery.com