> Isn't the gimple cfg-cleanup we run post optimization (right before > expansion) not enough? Or the cfg-cleanup we perform right after expansion > now? At least if the branches are really caused by the gimplification > process I would expect things to be cleaned up at this point, no?
At least the patch has a non-null (albeit minor) effect, which pertains mainly to jump threading (typical diff attached, Ada code at -O0 on x86-64). -- Eric Botcazou
@@ -648,7 +648,6 @@ jmp .L70 .L206: nop -.L71: leaq -768(%rbp), %rax addq $448, %rax movq %rax, %rdi @@ -1107,7 +1106,6 @@ .LEHE34: cmpl $1, %ebx jne .L197 -.L93: movq 16(%rbp), %rax movzbl 186(%rax), %eax testb %al, %al @@ -1398,7 +1396,6 @@ call prime__worlds_secondary_greeks__compute_secondary_greeks__B68b___finalizer.3706 cmpl $1, %ebx jne .L198 -.L112: cmpb $0, -3925(%rbp) je .L113 movq 16(%rbp), %rax @@ -1672,14 +1669,14 @@ .L204: movq -4000(%rbp), %rax movq -4008(%rbp), %rdx - jmp .L151 + jmp .L156 .L186: movq %rax, %rcx movq %rdx, %rax cmpq $6, %rax je .L154 movq %rcx, %rax - jmp .L151 + jmp .L156 .L154: movq %rcx, -96(%rbp) movq -96(%rbp), %rax @@ -1712,7 +1709,6 @@ je .L67 jmp .L204 .L185: -.L151: jmp .L156 .L191: movq %rax, -4024(%rbp) @@ -1773,9 +1769,8 @@ .L197: movq -4016(%rbp), %rax movq -4032(%rbp), %rdx - jmp .L166 + jmp .L156 .L192: -.L166: jmp .L156 .L193: movq %rax, -4048(%rbp) @@ -1838,9 +1833,8 @@ jmp .L70 .L117: movq %r15, %rax - jmp .L173 + jmp .L174 .L196: -.L173: jmp .L174 .L175: .L174: @@ -2510,7 +2504,6 @@ jmp .L253 .L286: nop -.L254: movq 24(%rbp), %rax movzbl 101(%rax), %eax testb %al, %al @@ -2578,12 +2571,12 @@ .L285: movq %r14, %rax movq %r15, %rdx - jmp .L264 + jmp .L269 .L278: movq %rdx, %rcx cmpq $2, %rcx je .L267 - jmp .L264 + jmp .L269 .L267: movq %rax, -56(%rbp) movq -56(%rbp), %rax @@ -2617,7 +2610,6 @@ je .L250 jmp .L285 .L277: -.L264: jmp .L269 .L283: movq %rax, %rbx
