[PATCH] Fix up tm_clone_hasher

[PATCH] Fix up tm_clone_hasher

[Marek Polacek]

handle_cache_entry in tm_clone_hasher looks wrong: the condition
if (e != HTAB_EMPTY_ENTRY || e != HTAB_DELETED_ENTRY) is always true.  While
it could be fixed by just changing || into &&, I decided to follow suit and
do what we do in handle_cache_entry's elsewhere in the codebase.  I've fixed
a formatting issue below while at it.

Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
I think this should also go into 5.1.

2015-04-22  Marek Polacek  <polacek@redhat.com>

	* varasm.c (handle_cache_entry): Fix logic.

diff --git gcc/varasm.c gcc/varasm.c
index 1597de1..3fc0316 100644
--- gcc/varasm.c
+++ gcc/varasm.c
@@ -5779,21 +5779,20 @@ struct tm_clone_hasher : ggc_cache_hasher<tree_map *>
   static hashval_t hash (tree_map *m) { return tree_map_hash (m); }
   static bool equal (tree_map *a, tree_map *b) { return tree_map_eq (a, b); }
 
-  static void handle_cache_entry (tree_map *&e)
+  static void
+  handle_cache_entry (tree_map *&e)
   {
-    if (e != HTAB_EMPTY_ENTRY || e != HTAB_DELETED_ENTRY)
-      {
-	extern void gt_ggc_mx (tree_map *&);
-	if (ggc_marked_p (e->base.from))
-	  gt_ggc_mx (e);
-	else
-	  e = static_cast<tree_map *> (HTAB_DELETED_ENTRY);
-      }
+    extern void gt_ggc_mx (tree_map *&);
+    if (e == HTAB_EMPTY_ENTRY || e == HTAB_DELETED_ENTRY)
+      return;
+    else if (ggc_marked_p (e->base.from))
+      gt_ggc_mx (e);
+    else
+      e = static_cast<tree_map *> (HTAB_DELETED_ENTRY);
   }
 };
 
-static GTY((cache))
-     hash_table<tm_clone_hasher> *tm_clone_hash;
+static GTY((cache)) hash_table<tm_clone_hasher> *tm_clone_hash;
 
 void
 record_tm_clone_pair (tree o, tree n)

	Marek

Re: [PATCH] Fix up tm_clone_hasher

[Marek Polacek]

Ping.

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 05:24:43PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> handle_cache_entry in tm_clone_hasher looks wrong: the condition
> if (e != HTAB_EMPTY_ENTRY || e != HTAB_DELETED_ENTRY) is always true.  While
> it could be fixed by just changing || into &&, I decided to follow suit and
> do what we do in handle_cache_entry's elsewhere in the codebase.  I've fixed
> a formatting issue below while at it.
> 
> Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
> I think this should also go into 5.1.
> 
> 2015-04-22  Marek Polacek  <polacek@redhat.com>
> 
> 	* varasm.c (handle_cache_entry): Fix logic.
> 
> diff --git gcc/varasm.c gcc/varasm.c
> index 1597de1..3fc0316 100644
> --- gcc/varasm.c
> +++ gcc/varasm.c
> @@ -5779,21 +5779,20 @@ struct tm_clone_hasher : ggc_cache_hasher<tree_map *>
>    static hashval_t hash (tree_map *m) { return tree_map_hash (m); }
>    static bool equal (tree_map *a, tree_map *b) { return tree_map_eq (a, b); }
>  
> -  static void handle_cache_entry (tree_map *&e)
> +  static void
> +  handle_cache_entry (tree_map *&e)
>    {
> -    if (e != HTAB_EMPTY_ENTRY || e != HTAB_DELETED_ENTRY)
> -      {
> -	extern void gt_ggc_mx (tree_map *&);
> -	if (ggc_marked_p (e->base.from))
> -	  gt_ggc_mx (e);
> -	else
> -	  e = static_cast<tree_map *> (HTAB_DELETED_ENTRY);
> -      }
> +    extern void gt_ggc_mx (tree_map *&);
> +    if (e == HTAB_EMPTY_ENTRY || e == HTAB_DELETED_ENTRY)
> +      return;
> +    else if (ggc_marked_p (e->base.from))
> +      gt_ggc_mx (e);
> +    else
> +      e = static_cast<tree_map *> (HTAB_DELETED_ENTRY);
>    }
>  };
>  
> -static GTY((cache))
> -     hash_table<tm_clone_hasher> *tm_clone_hash;
> +static GTY((cache)) hash_table<tm_clone_hasher> *tm_clone_hash;
>  
>  void
>  record_tm_clone_pair (tree o, tree n)
> 
> 	Marek

	Marek

Re: [PATCH] Fix up tm_clone_hasher

[Jeff Law]

On 04/30/2015 03:30 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> Ping.
>
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 05:24:43PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
>> handle_cache_entry in tm_clone_hasher looks wrong: the condition
>> if (e != HTAB_EMPTY_ENTRY || e != HTAB_DELETED_ENTRY) is always true.  While
>> it could be fixed by just changing || into &&, I decided to follow suit and
>> do what we do in handle_cache_entry's elsewhere in the codebase.  I've fixed
>> a formatting issue below while at it.
>>
>> Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
>> I think this should also go into 5.1.
>>
>> 2015-04-22  Marek Polacek  <polacek@redhat.com>
>>
>> 	* varasm.c (handle_cache_entry): Fix logic.
OK.  Though I do wonder if we should try to unify this with the other 
instances to avoid the useless duplication.

jeff