From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15419 invoked by alias); 6 Jul 2005 13:49:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 15388 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Jul 2005 13:49:27 -0000 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Wed, 06 Jul 2005 13:49:27 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j66DnOLI030061; Wed, 6 Jul 2005 09:49:24 -0400 Received: from pobox.toronto.redhat.com (pobox.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.4]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j66DnNV07927; Wed, 6 Jul 2005 09:49:23 -0400 Received: from topo.toronto.redhat.com (vpn50-20.rdu.redhat.com [172.16.50.20]) by pobox.toronto.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j66DnM1M002922; Wed, 6 Jul 2005 09:49:22 -0400 Received: from topo.toronto.redhat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by topo.toronto.redhat.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j66DnIc8005474; Wed, 6 Jul 2005 09:49:18 -0400 Received: (from dnovillo@localhost) by topo.toronto.redhat.com (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id j66DnHZS005473; Wed, 6 Jul 2005 09:49:17 -0400 Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2005 13:49:00 -0000 From: Diego Novillo To: Michael Tegtmeyer Cc: Daniel Berlin , gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Existing tree functionality? Message-ID: <20050706134917.GA5438@topo.toronto.redhat.com> References: <1120653984.8189.52.camel@linux.site> <1120655196.8189.55.camel@linux.site> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-SW-Source: 2005-07/txt/msg00226.txt.bz2 On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 09:40:08AM -0400, Michael Tegtmeyer wrote: > Thanks-intraprocedural is all I need. > > Sorry, bit new to gcc internals (coming from SUIF), is anything missing > from referenced_vars list or is it complete? docs in tree-dfa.c state > that it doesn't look in statement operands. Does it just collect this from > the symbol tables? > No. It collects only the variables that are actually referenced in the function body. If you give us a few details of what you're looking for, we can probably help you better. Diego.