From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24169 invoked by alias); 13 Mar 2008 14:12:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 24153 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Mar 2008 14:12:40 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (216.239.45.13) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 14:12:17 +0000 Received: from zps78.corp.google.com (zps78.corp.google.com [172.25.146.78]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id m2DECEwk023258 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 07:12:14 -0700 Received: from py-out-1112.google.com (pybp76.prod.google.com [10.34.92.76]) by zps78.corp.google.com with ESMTP id m2DECDZm030575 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 07:12:13 -0700 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id p76so4495787pyb.5 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 07:12:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.65.83.18 with SMTP id k18mr20504834qbl.12.1205417532765; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 07:12:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.64.114.10 with HTTP; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 07:12:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 14:12:00 -0000 From: "Diego Novillo" To: "Jan Hubicka" Subject: Re: Continue stmt branch prediction Cc: "Andrew MacLeod" , "Jan Hubicka" , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20080313013740.GO24550@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20080209194852.GO1026@kam.mff.cuni.cz> <47B0CDB4.3070708@redhat.com> <20080305183319.GH24550@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <20080305222822.GC14011@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <47D818CE.10605@google.com> <20080313013740.GO24550@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2008-03/txt/msg00809.txt.bz2 On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 18:37, Jan Hubicka wrote: > This seems bit hackish way > to me to save one case label in DCE: DCE is a bit special among the > early passes in a way that it does worry about more side effects of > statements beside the usual operands+semantics of statements all the > other propagation passes are about. DCE has to know all GIMPLE > statement types (and it just aborts on any new). I would tend to argue > that with exception of DCE we can hardly come with early scalar cleanup > pass that really do care here and will need to special case MODIFY_EXPR > statement. Hm, good point. Let's leave it as a special instruction then. Diego.