From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lj1-x22a.google.com (mail-lj1-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22a]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 492B63858D20 for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2022 09:22:38 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 492B63858D20 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Received: by mail-lj1-x22a.google.com with SMTP id l8so17235223ljh.13 for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2022 01:22:38 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Ys9IS1+O8XfdmSZXK0iuNPeEjvzwiZmtj04dLrQ7RV4=; b=o75I/wnG1vbjN4Dw1bSF1b2ujcIcyyKqZ+XRKfmqyjz66+9HFudVsrn/byNibAneA+ gCEyOw3Vf1dTsezj3dKfbklKWdA1jZK/3g5mj+9jB+cFD9cKjfe5vZknUKQD1IDmQI3Z g/WYlSn9LmYvIj3R5mxiAUq07Rv/nDVO0n7vEAt0SHv0H3W65XdY+ANJhkm7TlD3VD98 d+Zinv586kHHG0W0xLgkX+ho+dgqlOQ42/BjcPe4UbWxL8a+nhQ0t10sP53Vc2Iwmnt2 brbgSFRJ71D4hpurcVsvVCbzEr8EuuE6yxHdZkwTkKFc1kS2OT0lcgUaZ3Mcnpa5QLog /3ZQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=Ys9IS1+O8XfdmSZXK0iuNPeEjvzwiZmtj04dLrQ7RV4=; b=uzOImamGejySrsKpBjoVkiUn3Js2W0PUkKtvI4cL75MGRv6n6LsuuttYXCT0rmsDdU 7LMtyK5KRwnp+xT4JLdsAtt56w3mFA9hbrfqUFYXqH0abdfv7jcKLdNXyjdyHp3/k/OA WOZp1JRVaub7VR8W/15TIvqDwjMoKILiB9Azi4JNFq2fTXspjxHuE07OuBlcXJ4kwHnx BnngT5P5kEGSEB/fvuQ8MC04OHTO1PfqAZVb2/UpJl3RanN55L+dLjqh0w7g+AZK4a99 SzaRokeF8hBzmaeGsTCgdfN+J3ZkMdUrcjIDUEuZg20X2uTlb0j4IjHOK4OJPDBB070b rkOw== X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pn4mgXusjbAZxGVe4q4eaczZnXp/JBimGUGOCLNkvoGoHsC6Flu lvQWF0MeQmr5CgtD5jxlmfe1KTDgyjhFM+F7jHw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf7LQifcUanXryHtQZy79JqwwdHkPECK+4PImiSfPM6igPMlN6jx0KSL0WURhsYiS214TOQ979A/HbLAYszgZiY= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:b812:0:b0:277:eba:852 with SMTP id u18-20020a2eb812000000b002770eba0852mr7447680ljo.31.1669108956666; Tue, 22 Nov 2022 01:22:36 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <2eb36356-ffbf-6c8b-2824-08e204280d52@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Richard Biener Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2022 10:22:24 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove legacy VRP (maybe?) To: Aldy Hernandez Cc: Jeff Law , Jakub Jelinek , "MacLeod, Andrew" , gcc-patches Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 10:04 AM Aldy Hernandez wrote: > > > > On 11/22/22 09:25, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 9:24 AM Richard Biener > > wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 5:49 PM Jeff Law wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> On 11/21/22 09:35, Aldy Hernandez via Gcc-patches wrote: > >>>> I've been playing around with removing the legacy VRP code for the > >>>> next release. It's a layered onion to get this right, but the first > >>>> bit is pretty straightforward and may be useful for this release. > >>>> Basically, it entails removing the old VRP pass itself, along with > >>>> value_range_equiv which have no producers left. The current users of > >>>> value_range_equiv don't put anything in the equivalence bitmaps, so > >>>> they're basically behaving like plain value_range. > >>>> > >>>> I removed as much as possible without having to change any behavior, > >>>> and this is what I came up with. Is this something that would be > >>>> useful for this release? Would it help release managers have less > >>>> unused cruft in the tree? > >>>> > >>>> Neither Andrew nor I have any strong feelings here. We don't foresee > >>>> the legacy code changing at all in the offseason, so we can just > >>>> accumulate these patches in local trees. > >>> > >>> I'd lean towards removal after gcc-13 releases. > >> > >> I think removing the ability to switch to the old implementation easens > >> maintainance so I'd prefer to have this before the gcc-13 release. > >> > >> So please go ahead. > > > > Btw, ASSERT_EXPR should also go away with this, no? > > Ah yes, for everything except ipa-*.* which uses it internally (and sets > it in its internal structures): > > - ASSERT_EXPR means that only the value in operand is allowed to > pass > through (without any change), for all other values the result is > unknown. Ick. But yeah, I can see how 'ASSERT_EXPR' looked nice to use here (but it's only a distinct value, so TARGET_OPTION_NODE would have worked here as well) > I can remove all other uses, including any externally visible documentation. Works for me. Richard. > Thanks. > Aldy >