Andrew Pinski - Re: Patch to move superblock formation to Tree-SSA (original) (raw)

This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.orgmailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

On Sep 23, 2005, at 3:48 PM, Robert Kidd wrote:

gcc/ChangeLog 2005-09-20 Robert Kidd rkidd@crhc.uiuc.edu

A couple questions/comments about the patch.

First why are you are you adding to basic_block_il_dependent when you could just set aux and not worry about visited in il.tree and if you are going to add il.tree, you may as well also move phi_nodes and stmt_list there too. Maybe rename visited to trace will be more helpful.

Since you are moving this from rtl to tree, you should remove the -dT. You
already removed the documentation about it.

This looks wrong: ! || (flag_sched2_use_traces && flag_schedule_insns_after_reload))

! || (flag_schedule_insns_after_reload))

Since flag_sched2_use_traces is always false now or is it always true.

why do you leave the following: if (dump_file) dump_flow_info (dump_file);

reg_scan (get_insns (), max_reg_num ());Both of those are rtl only. Also you removed cleanup cfg, shouldn't you have added
the TODO for cleanup cfg then?You should also change the properties required to include SSA form so that we can
reorder and get an ICE early on.
I also don't think you need the flag for tree on basic blocks, because if it is not
a rtl basic block, it will be a tree basic block.Seems to me you are also doing tracer too early in-- Pinski


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]