From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-293866-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 30415 invoked by alias); 7 Jun 2011 17:07:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 30401 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Jun 2011 17:07:01 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,SPF_HELO_PASS,TW_CF,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (74.125.121.67)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 07 Jun 2011 17:06:37 +0000
Received: from wpaz24.hot.corp.google.com (wpaz24.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.198.88])	by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id p57H6Zgm006932	for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 10:06:35 -0700
Received: from yia27 (yia27.prod.google.com [10.243.65.27])	by wpaz24.hot.corp.google.com with ESMTP id p57H4qxr029348	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT)	for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 10:06:34 -0700
Received: by yia27 with SMTP id 27so1300923yia.4        for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Tue, 07 Jun 2011 10:06:34 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.150.176.19 with SMTP id y19mr5730008ybe.358.1307466394162; Tue, 07 Jun 2011 10:06:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.151.26.21 with HTTP; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 10:06:34 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinroLbnQj+LnSCjhZCoZoeDFxc0aQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTim89r_RsLCqYjuWZMA=9Lic_4UXThZ2JJM--ajYb8epew@mail.gmail.com>	<20110601231202.224188ad.basile@starynkevitch.net>	<BANLkTikmNfvaUGopJ3OxQjHXYVx-_vyd5zgfo4DYLWWpKt_Dew@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=ndrCJGuPMqb5Hth=MfQEHTNeL0Q@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTik57D433ch9P9oH4=5xHr=J78JQAHdrsCf8Nuj8WUGMxQ@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTin6DK8LZEq-TbjrqWKD1oJXJG1xeA@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTimRE8HNRZax+g6Fu714drsoUazAoA@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=78w1_N+c-PGgV1K+m6C5+i6jJZW-pinvicXDitiq6dw@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTinroLbnQj+LnSCjhZCoZoeDFxc0aQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2011 17:07:00 -0000
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=TLLE2PWwkZDygFidftZ2OJBw8vOEDZkZi0vM3rbbBJg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Dump before flag
From: Xinliang David Li <davidxl@google.com>
To: Diego Novillo <dnovillo@google.com>
Cc: Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com>,        GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-System-Of-Record: true
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: 2011-06/txt/msg00551.txt.bz2

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Diego Novillo <dnovillo@google.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 09:51, Xinliang David Li <davidxl@google.com> wrot=
e:
>> Any suggestions on the dump position specification string, before and
>> after is not enough. How about
>>
>> start, before, after, and finish?
>>
>> I.e.
>>
>> -fdump-tree-pre-start --> dump IR before TODO_start of PRE pass
>> -fdump-tree-pre-before --> dump IR just before PRE after its TODO start =
finishes
>
> What would be the difference between these two? =A0The TODO_start
> actions don't affect the IL, in general.

But by design, it can right?

David

>
>> -fdump-tree-pre-after --> dump IR just after PRE
>> -fdump-tree-pre-finish --> dump it after TODO_finish of PRE?
>
> This would be to catch changes like cfg cleanup and SSA update
> actions, right? =A0Sure.
>
> I don't mind too much about the naming. =A0Anything that makes sense is
> good with me.
>
>
> Diego.
>