From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 57082 invoked by alias); 16 Aug 2016 11:56:24 -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 57069 invoked by uid 89); 16 Aug 2016 11:56:23 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=finalize, helpers X-HELO: mail-wm0-f48.google.com Received: from mail-wm0-f48.google.com (HELO mail-wm0-f48.google.com) (74.125.82.48) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 16 Aug 2016 11:56:13 +0000 Received: by mail-wm0-f48.google.com with SMTP id o80so162274799wme.1 for ; Tue, 16 Aug 2016 04:56:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=peL4MaS0sANnX3/ZjxX4bJSrHrEYvrK/9m2rNgN5tkw=; b=ErRvQ9D37QUqFgtg/MpVylHnT9ZVR0EzltUtVR792en/O/nkE04DE+hRCs9SqATAvY 3DYE+AuYM+w9slO1zbDLjJ4vZa/fwdviEVV90QZ01gSQZl26nHgim43ywzc+vbwIjjne lfNHnBn3OJ9s+9Q0w/Urtxw5P9fFWeqY445LOih9OLoGZU+6V3ywH4/hwBCJBclpeTPk k7sftUXJzG0dmqjEw7MfJWWHCiTlDdUVtm/OIwp/27N+ZjllRwHG/Pf0SIpfGXpl419k /9uyGnPwuYUxEdRvU3eeJ3xz5EtlicIoF0+DfNk02/FUGQ+WRsfaIPYQuSnBxyqE0TJF a4nQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoouvVEjVFA3xMMb59GcgdcuuljAAzHoKX4sxJvHFpQm41WtTeft/X7gAmD6vNDId/uzsuRiZ02JZ6eGCrgA== X-Received: by 10.194.47.7 with SMTP id z7mr36230828wjm.63.1471348570866; Tue, 16 Aug 2016 04:56:10 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.28.137.202 with HTTP; Tue, 16 Aug 2016 04:56:10 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <83dbcfbd-8e81-7df9-3519-5f98a332dfd2@linaro.org> References: <57886949.8010300@linaro.org> <57886A2A.4070703@linaro.org> <21d3ea50-a799-0b5b-4736-3beeca7860c4@linaro.org> <89a0bb8c-2744-49c5-8c4b-e2b4e92a26c3@linaro.org> <64f0e8a8-a933-53ff-bc60-e21db86f2608@linaro.org> <83dbcfbd-8e81-7df9-3519-5f98a332dfd2@linaro.org> From: Richard Biener Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 11:56:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC][IPA-VRP] Re-factor tree-vrp to factor out common code To: kugan Cc: "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" , Jan Hubicka , Martin Jambor Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-08/txt/msg01174.txt.bz2 On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 10:09 AM, kugan wrote: > > > > On 23/07/16 20:12, kugan wrote: >> >> Hi Richard, >> >>>> As we had value_range_type in tree-ssanames.h why not put value_range >>>> there? >>>> >>> For IPA_VRP, we now need value_range used in ipa-prop.h (in ipa-vrp >>> patch). Based on this, attached patch now adds struct value_range to >>> tree-ssanames.h and fixes the header files. Please note that I also had >>> to add other headers in few places due to the dependency. Are you OK >>> with this ? >> >> Here is alternate patch where we keep struct value_range and enum >> value_range_type to tree-vrp.h. May be it is a better approach? Please >> let me know what is your preference. >> > > Ping? > > This patch places value_range_type and value_range in tree-vrp.h. May be > this is better? > > Alternate patch which keeps value_range_type and value_range in > tree-ssanames.h is in: > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-07/msg01491.html > > I also added the necessary header files changed needed for ipa-vrp as part > of this patch so that changes needed are clear. I think tree-vrp.h is a better place. Please don't export functions you don't need (the _1 helpers). I still believe sharing vrp_initialize/finalize is wrong and the lattice setup / teardown should be split out. Richard. > Thaks, > Kugan