Thanks for the update, looks good. Could you post a changelog too
so that I can use it when committing?
The changelog was the only reason I didn't just push the patch,
but FWIW, a couple of very minor things…
Zhongyunde <zhongyu...@huawei.com> writes:
> diff --git a/gcc/regrename.c b/gcc/regrename.c
> old mode 100644
> new mode 100755
> index 637b3cbe6d7..815ed22805d
> --- a/gcc/regrename.c
> +++ b/gcc/regrename.c
> @@ -684,10 +684,12 @@ merge_chains (du_head_p c1, du_head_p c2)
> c1->cannot_rename |= c2->cannot_rename;
> }
>
> -/* Analyze the current function and build chains for renaming. */
> +/* Analyze the current function and build chains for renaming.
> + If INCLUDE_ALL_BLOCKS_P is set to true, should process all blocks,
> + ignoring BB_DISABLE_SCHEDULE. The default value is true. */
I think s/should// here, since GCC comments usually use an imperative
style.
> @@ -737,6 +739,14 @@ regrename_analyze (bitmap bb_mask)
> if (dump_file)
> fprintf (dump_file, "\nprocessing block %d:\n", bb1->index);
>
> + if (!include_all_block_p && (bb1->flags & BB_DISABLE_SCHEDULE) != 0)
> + {
> + if (dump_file)
> + fprintf (dump_file, "avoid disrupting the sms schedule of bb %d\n",
> + bb1->index);
bb1->index should be indented below “dump_file”.
Richard
