From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-294092-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 7139 invoked by alias); 9 Jun 2011 22:32:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 7130 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Jun 2011 22:32:29 -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,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; Thu, 09 Jun 2011 22:32:15 +0000
Received: from kpbe15.cbf.corp.google.com (kpbe15.cbf.corp.google.com [172.25.105.79])	by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id p59MWDDi000936	for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Thu, 9 Jun 2011 15:32:13 -0700
Received: from gxk19 (gxk19.prod.google.com [10.202.11.19])	by kpbe15.cbf.corp.google.com with ESMTP id p59MLnZV032007	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT)	for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Thu, 9 Jun 2011 15:32:11 -0700
Received: by gxk19 with SMTP id 19so1667129gxk.17        for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Thu, 09 Jun 2011 15:32:11 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.151.79.10 with SMTP id g10mr2682697ybl.301.1307658731504; Thu, 09 Jun 2011 15:32:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.151.26.21 with HTTP; Thu, 9 Jun 2011 15:32:11 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=quSuAmfdhtK59q02DqL-no7LT-Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTikXRUTmZZokg4OtJA5fBrWUG+7yZux3=CLDBox1Q+Qhtw@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTimyzxKk3bVZmHLB0c_XzSLEGaX-VA@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=9ipuRzyenO-1bHVpsx5EKmG+V=HXJ2NOipAwre6MgbA@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTikV9aCxBteBVBa4B+YCxEX4zhSm+Q@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=y6cr4auzTps9eakr0Uo8X3zxHennB8cCENh8SdFP+mg@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTimKpnPxF7iFWq7D01U-KZV0RL9Lew@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=1zc-WrJy8Lmru6+Uoc6acAPwuDA@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTin_8-jaTqSnBMVCZXYnU+amieqWrpO7zQas8a=2bWrn=g@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=B5_KxpwRo9tTjy69VwWMcJj=QmQ@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTikpK4JLpE_P8dRBxtDc_Bn9Kv4NZFgAgYADk1S-Hn=U2Q@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=hiAWmWV0GnuqJqC7cRZU9EEy3TgNtkK7ZugMj-1N+_A@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=quSuAmfdhtK59q02DqL-no7LT-Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2011 22:51:00 -0000
Message-ID: <BANLkTimQ8u5o3_8YwAYwbP2x8E6qUyFo6G6niiWx+bWK0AyfxA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: -fdump-passes -fenable-xxx=func_name_list
From: Xinliang David Li <davidxl@google.com>
To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.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/msg00777.txt.bz2

Though I can not reproduce it, it might be related to what Richard
mentioned in the review -- The TODO's are executed though the pass is
not. This opened up a can of worm -- I will revert the patches for
now.

David


On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 3:05 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 11:54 AM, Xinliang David Li <davidxl@google.com> w=
rote:
>> Please review the attached two patches.
>>
>> In the first patch, gate functions are cleaned up. All the per
>> function legality checks are moved into the executor and the
>> optimization heuristic checks (optimize for size) remain in the
>> gators. These allow the the following overriding order:
>>
>> =A0 =A0common flags (O2, -ftree-vrp, -fgcse etc) =A0 <--- =A0compiler
>> heuristic (optimize for size/speed) <--- -fdisable/enable forcing pass
>> options =A0<--- legality check
>>
>> Testing under going. Ok for trunk?
>>
>
> This caused:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D49350
>
> --
> H.J.
>