* Re: Question re tree-ssa-ccp.c:substitute_and_fold
@ 2004-11-28 23:27 Richard Kenner
2004-11-28 23:53 ` Diego Novillo
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Richard Kenner @ 2004-11-28 23:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dnovillo; +Cc: gcc
I had to do the same thing on tree-cleanup-branch. Similar reasons.
You also want to unconditionally call modify_stmt in here. So you end
up with:
Can you to import it in from that branch? I don't have that branch
checked out anyplace yet. Or else just send me the ChangeLog
for it and I'll do it.
Thanks.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Question re tree-ssa-ccp.c:substitute_and_fold
2004-11-28 23:27 Question re tree-ssa-ccp.c:substitute_and_fold Richard Kenner
@ 2004-11-28 23:53 ` Diego Novillo
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Diego Novillo @ 2004-11-28 23:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Kenner; +Cc: gcc
On Sun, 2004-11-28 at 18:18 -0500, Richard Kenner wrote:
> I had to do the same thing on tree-cleanup-branch. Similar reasons.
> You also want to unconditionally call modify_stmt in here. So you end
> up with:
>
> Can you to import it in from that branch? I don't have that branch
> checked out anyplace yet. Or else just send me the ChangeLog
> for it and I'll do it.
>
Not really. The diff contains many other changes. That's inside a
heavily re-written portion of the compiler. It's easier if you just c-
n-p the snippet I sent. The only difference with your patch is that it
unconditionally calls modify_stmt. The rest is identical.
Diego.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Question re tree-ssa-ccp.c:substitute_and_fold
@ 2004-11-27 2:13 Richard Kenner
2004-11-28 23:18 ` Diego Novillo
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Richard Kenner @ 2004-11-27 2:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc
This is PR18662, the failure of ACATS test c97114a.
This ICE's with
../../test/c97114a.adb: In function 'C97114A.T':
../../test/c97114a.adb:132: error: Statement marked for throw, but doesn't.
# VUSE <S0D.926_251>;
D.1121_112 = S0D.926.ARRAYD.924[1]{lb: 1 sz: 8}.sD.818;
Before replace_uses_in, the subscript 1 was a variable (D.1120_111).
Since flag_non_call_exceptions is true, the former statement can trap
but the latter cannot.
But because replaced_address is still zero, we don't call
maybe_clean_eh_stmt and we need to.
The patch below calls it unconditionally. That may not be correct,
though I'm not not at all sure what the correct condition is.
Suggestions?
*** tree-ssa-ccp.c 23 Nov 2004 01:27:41 -0000 2.51
--- tree-ssa-ccp.c 24 Nov 2004 14:55:10 -0000
*************** substitute_and_fold (void)
*** 583,593 ****
need to rename VDEFs. */
if (replaced_address || changed)
! {
! mark_new_vars_to_rename (stmt, vars_to_rename);
! if (maybe_clean_eh_stmt (stmt))
! tree_purge_dead_eh_edges (bb);
! }
else
modify_stmt (stmt);
}
--- 583,591 ----
need to rename VDEFs. */
if (replaced_address || changed)
! mark_new_vars_to_rename (stmt, vars_to_rename);
else
modify_stmt (stmt);
+ if (maybe_clean_eh_stmt (stmt))
+ tree_purge_dead_eh_edges (bb);
}
Note that a lot of the functions in tree-eh.c don't have the required
documentation in front of them.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Question re tree-ssa-ccp.c:substitute_and_fold
2004-11-27 2:13 Richard Kenner
@ 2004-11-28 23:18 ` Diego Novillo
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Diego Novillo @ 2004-11-28 23:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Kenner; +Cc: gcc
On Fri, 2004-11-26 at 20:53 -0500, Richard Kenner wrote:
> This is PR18662, the failure of ACATS test c97114a.
>
> This ICE's with
>
> ../../test/c97114a.adb: In function 'C97114A.T':
> ../../test/c97114a.adb:132: error: Statement marked for throw, but doesn't.
> # VUSE <S0D.926_251>;
> D.1121_112 = S0D.926.ARRAYD.924[1]{lb: 1 sz: 8}.sD.818;
>
> Before replace_uses_in, the subscript 1 was a variable (D.1120_111).
> Since flag_non_call_exceptions is true, the former statement can trap
> but the latter cannot.
>
> But because replaced_address is still zero, we don't call
> maybe_clean_eh_stmt and we need to.
>
> The patch below calls it unconditionally. That may not be correct,
> though I'm not not at all sure what the correct condition is.
>
> Suggestions?
>
I had to do the same thing on tree-cleanup-branch. Similar reasons.
You also want to unconditionally call modify_stmt in here. So you end
up with:
if (did_replace)
{
bool changed = fold_stmt (bsi_stmt_ptr (i));
stmt = bsi_stmt(i);
/* If we folded a builtin function, we'll likely
need to rename VDEFs. */
if (replaced_address || changed)
mark_new_vars_to_rename (stmt, vars_to_rename);
/* If we cleaned up EH information from the statement,
remove EH edges. */
if (maybe_clean_eh_stmt (stmt))
tree_purge_dead_eh_edges (bb);
modify_stmt (stmt);
}
Diego.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-11-28 23:18 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-11-28 23:27 Question re tree-ssa-ccp.c:substitute_and_fold Richard Kenner
2004-11-28 23:53 ` Diego Novillo
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-11-27 2:13 Richard Kenner
2004-11-28 23:18 ` Diego Novillo
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).