From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-60800-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 32412 invoked by alias); 1 Oct 2002 16:08:16 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 32405 invoked from network); 1 Oct 2002 16:08:14 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz) (195.113.18.106)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 1 Oct 2002 16:08:14 -0000
Received: from camelot.ms.mff.cuni.cz (kampanus.ms.mff.cuni.cz [195.113.18.107])
	by nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz (Postfix) with SMTP
	id 411E64E2D8; Tue,  1 Oct 2002 18:08:15 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by camelot.ms.mff.cuni.cz (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 1 Oct 2002 18:08:12 +0200
Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2002 09:08:00 -0000
From: Jan Hubicka <jh@suse.cz>
To: Olivier Hainque <hainque@ACT-Europe.FR>
Cc: Jan Hubicka <jh@suse.cz>, Michael Matz <matz@suse.de>,
	gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Question on fixup_abnormal_edges
Message-ID: <20021001160812.GK29411@kam.mff.cuni.cz>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0210011154390.22516-100000@wotan.suse.de> <Pine.LNX.4.33.0210011202140.22516-100000@wotan.suse.de> <20021001124034.A15939@berlin.int.act-europe.fr> <20021001112308.GQ29411@kam.mff.cuni.cz> <20021001154929.D16040@berlin.int.act-europe.fr> <20021001140254.GY29411@kam.mff.cuni.cz> <20021001160854.A16255@berlin.int.act-europe.fr> <20021001141208.GZ29411@kam.mff.cuni.cz> <20021001174435.A16300@berlin.int.act-europe.fr>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20021001174435.A16300@berlin.int.act-europe.fr>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i
X-SW-Source: 2002-10/txt/msg00024.txt.bz2

> Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > This looks like a bug in caller save code.  It caller saves around the
> > noreturn call that is useless.  I guess the proper fix is to look for
> > REG_NORETURN note in caller save code and suppress generation of the
> > sequence when it happends.
> 
>  I believe I see. Will check out and followup.
There is another problem when I think about that - there should not be
live register accross REG_NORETURN note and thus no caller save need.
Do you have any idea why the register is alive?  Perhaps it came from
updatng the liveness - you can check by looking at .live and later
dumps.

Honza
> 
>  Thanks a lot, a real lot, for the help :)
> 
>  Kind Regards,
> 
>  Olivier
> 
>  
>