From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-329289-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 14292 invoked by alias); 17 Oct 2012 01:51:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 14164 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Oct 2012 01:51:53 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.2 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 17 Oct 2012 01:51:40 +0000
Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23])	by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q9H1pcnv019043	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK);	Tue, 16 Oct 2012 21:51:38 -0400
Received: from pebble.twiddle.home (vpn1-49-249.bne.redhat.com [10.64.49.249])	by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q9H1pX2w007610;	Tue, 16 Oct 2012 21:51:34 -0400
Message-ID: <507E0F25.8010605@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 04:54:00 -0000
From: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121009 Thunderbird/16.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Aldy Hernandez <aldyh@redhat.com>
CC: Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com>, gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,        Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com>,        Ian Lance Taylor <ian@airs.com>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>,        Andrew MacLeod <amacleod@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [path] PR 54900: store data race in if-conversion pass
References: <507C015F.2090508@redhat.com> <CAKOQZ8y7kmvw0gbK2yDEzRvs+DZjxGLUUMFRqA7Ab5bXiPhHwg@mail.gmail.com> <507DF364.2010208@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <507DF364.2010208@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2012-10/txt/msg01616.txt.bz2

On 2012-10-17 09:53, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> +/* Like memory_modified_in_insn_p, but return TRUE if INSN will
> +   *SURELY* modify the memory contents of MEM.  */
> +bool
> +memory_surely_modified_in_insn_p (const_rtx mem, const_rtx insn)

I don't like the word "surely".  Are we certain or not?

It's longer, but perhaps "definitely" or "must_be"?


r~