From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "John David Anglin" To: rth@redhat.com (Richard Henderson) Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Simple returns are broken in gcc 3.X Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 10:39:00 -0000 Message-id: <200107311736.f6VHafdJ027426@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> References: <20010731095607.E4090@redhat.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-07/msg02121.html > On Tue, Jul 31, 2001 at 10:39:58AM -0400, John David Anglin wrote: > > > Err, yes it would. There's another bit in expand_function_end. > > > > Isn't that bit necessary if there isn't an epilogue? > > No, look at thread_prologue_and_epilogue_insns. It looks like the "optimize" test needs to be removed from thread_prologue_and_epilogue_insns so that emit_return_into_block is always called. Is that OK? I presume that this is there because we didn't have a proper CFG when not optimizing. Dave -- J. David Anglin dave.anglin@nrc.ca National Research Council of Canada (613) 990-0752 (FAX: 952-6605)