From: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
To: Iain Sandoe <iain@sandoe.co.uk>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] coroutines: Small cleanups to await_statement_walker [NFC].
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2021 13:32:26 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <58a39ec9-cb56-c089-eaf2-3d43f317b272@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <732D8CCD-ABAE-43EB-B73C-D32E4553D84F@sandoe.co.uk>
On 9/14/21 11:36, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> Hi
>
> Some small code cleanups that allow us to have just one place that
> we handle a statement with await expression(s) embedded. Also we
> can reduce the work done to figure out whether a statement contains
> any such expressions.
>
> tested on x86_64,powerpc64le-linux x86_64-darwin
> OK for master?
> thanks
> Iain
>
> -----
>
> There is no need to make a MODIFY_EXPR for any of the condition
> vars that we synthesize.
>
> Expansion of co_return can be carried out independently of any
> co_awaits that might be contained which simplifies this.
>
> Where we are rewriting statements to handle await expression
> logic, there is no need to carry out any analysis - we just need
> to detect the presence of any co_await.
>
> Signed-off-by: Iain Sandoe <iain@sandoe.co.uk>
>
> gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
>
> * coroutines.cc (await_statement_walker): Code cleanups.
> ---
> gcc/cp/coroutines.cc | 121 ++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
> 1 file changed, 56 insertions(+), 65 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/cp/coroutines.cc b/gcc/cp/coroutines.cc
> index d2cc2e73c89..27556723b71 100644
> --- a/gcc/cp/coroutines.cc
> +++ b/gcc/cp/coroutines.cc
> @@ -3412,16 +3412,11 @@ await_statement_walker (tree *stmt, int *do_subtree, void *d)
> return NULL_TREE;
> }
>
> - /* We have something to be handled as a single statement. */
> - bool has_cleanup_wrapper = TREE_CODE (*stmt) == CLEANUP_POINT_EXPR;
> - hash_set<tree> visited;
> - awpts->saw_awaits = 0;
> - hash_set<tree> truth_aoif_to_expand;
> - awpts->truth_aoif_to_expand = &truth_aoif_to_expand;
> - awpts->needs_truth_if_exp = false;
> - awpts->has_awaiter_init = false;
> + /* We have something to be handled as a single statement. We have to handle
> + a few statements specially where await statements have to be moved out of
> + constructs. */
> tree expr = *stmt;
> - if (has_cleanup_wrapper)
> + if (TREE_CODE (*stmt) == CLEANUP_POINT_EXPR)
> expr = TREE_OPERAND (expr, 0);
> STRIP_NOPS (expr);
>
> @@ -3437,6 +3432,8 @@ await_statement_walker (tree *stmt, int *do_subtree, void *d)
> transforms can be implemented. */
> case IF_STMT:
> {
> + tree *await_ptr;
> + hash_set<tree> visited;
> /* Transform 'if (cond with awaits) then stmt1 else stmt2' into
> bool cond = cond with awaits.
> if (cond) then stmt1 else stmt2. */
> @@ -3444,10 +3441,8 @@ await_statement_walker (tree *stmt, int *do_subtree, void *d)
> /* We treat the condition as if it was a stand-alone statement,
> to see if there are any await expressions which will be analyzed
> and registered. */
> - if ((res = cp_walk_tree (&IF_COND (if_stmt),
> - analyze_expression_awaits, d, &visited)))
> - return res;
> - if (!awpts->saw_awaits)
> + if (!(cp_walk_tree (&IF_COND (if_stmt),
> + find_any_await, &await_ptr, &visited)))
> return NULL_TREE; /* Nothing special to do here. */
>
> gcc_checking_assert (!awpts->bind_stack->is_empty());
> @@ -3463,7 +3458,7 @@ await_statement_walker (tree *stmt, int *do_subtree, void *d)
> /* We want to initialize the new variable with the expression
> that contains the await(s) and potentially also needs to
> have truth_if expressions expanded. */
> - tree new_s = build2_loc (sloc, MODIFY_EXPR, boolean_type_node,
> + tree new_s = build2_loc (sloc, INIT_EXPR, boolean_type_node,
> newvar, cond_inner);
> finish_expr_stmt (new_s);
> IF_COND (if_stmt) = newvar;
> @@ -3477,25 +3472,25 @@ await_statement_walker (tree *stmt, int *do_subtree, void *d)
> break;
> case FOR_STMT:
> {
> + tree *await_ptr;
> + hash_set<tree> visited;
> /* for loops only need special treatment if the condition or the
> iteration expression contain a co_await. */
> tree for_stmt = *stmt;
> /* Sanity check. */
> - if ((res = cp_walk_tree (&FOR_INIT_STMT (for_stmt),
> - analyze_expression_awaits, d, &visited)))
> - return res;
> - gcc_checking_assert (!awpts->saw_awaits);
> -
> - if ((res = cp_walk_tree (&FOR_COND (for_stmt),
> - analyze_expression_awaits, d, &visited)))
> - return res;
> - bool for_cond_await = awpts->saw_awaits != 0;
> - unsigned save_awaits = awpts->saw_awaits;
> -
> - if ((res = cp_walk_tree (&FOR_EXPR (for_stmt),
> - analyze_expression_awaits, d, &visited)))
> - return res;
> - bool for_expr_await = awpts->saw_awaits > save_awaits;
> + gcc_checking_assert
> + (!(cp_walk_tree (&FOR_INIT_STMT (for_stmt), find_any_await,
> + &await_ptr, &visited)));
What's the rationale for this assert? [expr.await] seems to say
explicitly that an await can appear in the initializer of an init-statement.
> + visited.empty ();
> + bool for_cond_await
> + = cp_walk_tree (&FOR_COND (for_stmt), find_any_await,
> + &await_ptr, &visited);
> +
> + visited.empty ();
> + bool for_expr_await
> + = cp_walk_tree (&FOR_EXPR (for_stmt), find_any_await,
> + &await_ptr, &visited);
>
> /* If the condition has an await, then we will need to rewrite the
> loop as
> @@ -3538,7 +3533,12 @@ await_statement_walker (tree *stmt, int *do_subtree, void *d)
> = create_named_label_with_ctx (sloc, buf, NULL_TREE);
> free (buf);
> add_stmt (build_stmt (sloc, LABEL_EXPR, it_expr_label));
> - add_stmt (FOR_EXPR (for_stmt));
> + tree for_expr = FOR_EXPR (for_stmt);
> + /* Present the iteration expression as a statement. */
> + if (TREE_CODE (for_expr) == CLEANUP_POINT_EXPR)
> + for_expr = TREE_OPERAND (for_expr, 0);
> + STRIP_NOPS (for_expr);
> + finish_expr_stmt (for_expr);
> FOR_EXPR (for_stmt) = NULL_TREE;
> FOR_BODY (for_stmt) = pop_stmt_list (insert_list);
> /* rewrite continue statements to goto label. */
> @@ -3565,11 +3565,11 @@ await_statement_walker (tree *stmt, int *do_subtree, void *d)
> break;
> stmt..
> } */
> + tree *await_ptr;
> + hash_set<tree> visited;
> tree while_stmt = *stmt;
> - if ((res = cp_walk_tree (&WHILE_COND (while_stmt),
> - analyze_expression_awaits, d, &visited)))
> - return res;
> - if (!awpts->saw_awaits)
> + if (!(cp_walk_tree (&WHILE_COND (while_stmt),
> + find_any_await, &await_ptr, &visited)))
> return NULL_TREE; /* Nothing special to do here. */
>
> tree insert_list = push_stmt_list ();
> @@ -3595,10 +3595,10 @@ await_statement_walker (tree *stmt, int *do_subtree, void *d)
> break;
> } while (true); */
> tree do_stmt = *stmt;
> - if ((res = cp_walk_tree (&DO_COND (do_stmt),
> - analyze_expression_awaits, d, &visited)))
> - return res;
> - if (!awpts->saw_awaits)
> + tree *await_ptr;
> + hash_set<tree> visited;
> + if (!(cp_walk_tree (&DO_COND (do_stmt),
> + find_any_await, &await_ptr, &visited)))
> return NULL_TREE; /* Nothing special to do here. */
>
> tree insert_list = push_stmt_list ();
> @@ -3621,10 +3621,10 @@ await_statement_walker (tree *stmt, int *do_subtree, void *d)
> switch_type cond = cond with awaits
> switch (cond) stmt. */
> tree sw_stmt = *stmt;
> - if ((res = cp_walk_tree (&SWITCH_STMT_COND (sw_stmt),
> - analyze_expression_awaits, d, &visited)))
> - return res;
> - if (!awpts->saw_awaits)
> + tree *await_ptr;
> + hash_set<tree> visited;
> + if (!(cp_walk_tree (&SWITCH_STMT_COND (sw_stmt),
> + find_any_await, &await_ptr, &visited)))
> return NULL_TREE; /* Nothing special to do here. */
>
> gcc_checking_assert (!awpts->bind_stack->is_empty());
> @@ -3665,9 +3665,6 @@ await_statement_walker (tree *stmt, int *do_subtree, void *d)
> { expr; p.return_void(); goto final_suspend;}
> - for co_return [non void expr];
> { p.return_value(expr); goto final_suspend; } */
> - if ((res = cp_walk_tree (stmt, analyze_expression_awaits,
> - d, &visited)))
> - return res;
> location_t loc = EXPR_LOCATION (expr);
> tree call = TREE_OPERAND (expr, 1);
> expr = TREE_OPERAND (expr, 0);
> @@ -3675,39 +3672,33 @@ await_statement_walker (tree *stmt, int *do_subtree, void *d)
> /* [stmt.return.coroutine], 2.2
> If expr is present and void, it is placed immediately before
> the call for return_void; */
> - tree *maybe_await_stmt = NULL;
> if (expr && VOID_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (expr)))
> - {
> - finish_expr_stmt (expr);
> - /* If the return argument was a void expression, then any
> - awaits must be contained in that. */
> - maybe_await_stmt = tsi_stmt_ptr (tsi_last (ret_list));
> - }
> + finish_expr_stmt (expr);
> /* Insert p.return_{void,value(expr)}. */
> finish_expr_stmt (call);
> - /* Absent a return of a void expression, any awaits must be in
> - the parameter to return_value(). */
> - if (!maybe_await_stmt)
> - maybe_await_stmt = tsi_stmt_ptr (tsi_last (ret_list));
> TREE_USED (awpts->fs_label) = 1;
> add_stmt (build_stmt (loc, GOTO_EXPR, awpts->fs_label));
> *stmt = pop_stmt_list (ret_list);
> + res = cp_walk_tree (stmt, await_statement_walker, d, NULL);
> /* Once this is complete, we will have processed subtrees. */
> *do_subtree = 0;
> - if (awpts->saw_awaits)
> - {
> - gcc_checking_assert (maybe_await_stmt);
> - res = cp_walk_tree (maybe_await_stmt, await_statement_walker,
> - d, NULL);
> - if (res)
> - return res;
> - }
> - return NULL_TREE; /* Done. */
> + return res;
> }
> break;
> }
> else if (EXPR_P (expr))
> {
> + hash_set<tree> visited;
> + tree *await_ptr;
> + if (!(cp_walk_tree (stmt, find_any_await, &await_ptr, &visited)))
> + return NULL_TREE; /* Nothing special to do here. */
> +
> + visited.empty ();
> + awpts->saw_awaits = 0;
> + hash_set<tree> truth_aoif_to_expand;
> + awpts->truth_aoif_to_expand = &truth_aoif_to_expand;
> + awpts->needs_truth_if_exp = false;
> + awpts->has_awaiter_init = false;
> if ((res = cp_walk_tree (stmt, analyze_expression_awaits, d, &visited)))
> return res;
> *do_subtree = 0; /* Done subtrees. */
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-15 17:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-14 15:36 Iain Sandoe
2021-09-15 17:32 ` Jason Merrill [this message]
2021-09-15 18:32 ` Iain Sandoe
2021-09-15 19:50 ` Jason Merrill
2021-09-16 11:58 ` Iain Sandoe
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2021-09-07 19:38 Iain Sandoe
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=58a39ec9-cb56-c089-eaf2-3d43f317b272@redhat.com \
--to=jason@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=iain@sandoe.co.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).