From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 111011 invoked by alias); 17 May 2017 12:36:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 110998 invoked by uid 89); 17 May 2017 12:36:40 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=H*f:sk:6b4fc53, H*i:sk:6b4fc53 X-HELO: mail-oi0-f50.google.com Received: from mail-oi0-f50.google.com (HELO mail-oi0-f50.google.com) (209.85.218.50) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 17 May 2017 12:36:39 +0000 Received: by mail-oi0-f50.google.com with SMTP id w10so12995596oif.0 for ; Wed, 17 May 2017 05:36:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=vy1uXhSeOcRyIHH3kwkpiVYoZyhaVvIdasPHGvbX2Pw=; b=nwL6ZKZjKNQ/3w0u6E2jwNw9wn/QBI95Muu6nKjAInOpeJ8nJbHgwYBvybV+Akv8bL c1SEmCr52lEodOK+fd3otJEaknLUsxUSmLn7CjkW2eEzlsJkGfi48isxgn94zZzAzH8i oursnNwGJTIh9ur3wKFNxU1/4nQbv13qStlimTaNz/EUHukyR4zqK61dWGI/QQd9UL/1 evYystzlf1LqW97LO30arcYBDpMwow5rU/TRXBgv0lZxt/z2IwXEsCDrSATQlUv+2QZL cf1R8w8j4S20DL1oRzYlgrRdX3en8HBovd1yivOW3sk2faoAmlBS/Hm1rETGvPHUTOVU 0huw== X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcB+kXz9cva+4nXylzKEuhDg70vecQ2ioejOTDtdXkm7UZ3kDsXx g7GS4KeaDi8yMZ3KBB7T/SlwmOiu9w== X-Received: by 10.157.12.67 with SMTP id 61mr1781770otr.237.1495024600464; Wed, 17 May 2017 05:36:40 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.157.51.83 with HTTP; Wed, 17 May 2017 05:36:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6b4fc53c-5ea5-96b6-d881-7dc363fd63ff@suse.cz> References: <668c62b5-9603-47c5-9bfe-266d0d369a1f@suse.cz> <412435ae-4a9b-99ff-cb78-cf157b778303@suse.cz> <8cca10ba-1a98-2e0d-2fbd-ce1c1c4df1c2@suse.cz> <20170506125238.dw2qg5jniyyp7ss2@ball> <6b4fc53c-5ea5-96b6-d881-7dc363fd63ff@suse.cz> From: Richard Biener Date: Wed, 17 May 2017 12:37:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/N] Simplify usage of some TDF_* flags. To: =?UTF-8?Q?Martin_Li=C5=A1ka?= Cc: Trevor Saunders , GCC Patches Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-05/txt/msg01378.txt.bz2 On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 3:53 PM, Martin Li=C5=A1ka wrote: > There's one another patch that merges some TDF_* flags that have > very similar meaning and do not influence test-suite, because > nobody is using them for scanning. > > Patch can bootstrap on ppc64le-redhat-linux and survives regression tests. > > Ready to be installed? I think the patch removes too many TDF flags. For example -fdump-tree-xxx-address will then print not only addresses of gimple stmts but also of each tree operand. The change to dump_generic_node looks ok though. Did you look who intoduced TDF_COMMENT? ISTR it was for some graph dumping stuff. Likewise the TDF_VERBOSE use in tree-cfg.c shouldn't be replaced with -details but dropped if you trop the flag. Did you look at effects in dump-files at all? Richard. > Martin