Hello, Just another small cleanup. This probably made sense before function-at-a-time became the norm, 10 years ago.
Bootstrapped&tested on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu and x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. OK for trunk? Ciao! Steven * emit-rtl.c (emit_label_before): Do not allow the same label to be emitted twice. (emit_label_after): Likewise. (emit_label): Likewise. Index: emit-rtl.c =================================================================== --- emit-rtl.c (revision 189482) +++ emit-rtl.c (working copy) @@ -4221,14 +4221,9 @@ emit_barrier_before (rtx before) rtx emit_label_before (rtx label, rtx before) { - /* This can be called twice for the same label as a result of the - confusion that follows a syntax error! So make it harmless. */ - if (INSN_UID (label) == 0) - { - INSN_UID (label) = cur_insn_uid++; - add_insn_before (label, before, NULL); - } - + gcc_checking_assert (INSN_UID (label) == 0); + INSN_UID (label) = cur_insn_uid++; + add_insn_before (label, before, NULL); return label; } @@ -4387,15 +4382,9 @@ emit_barrier_after (rtx after) rtx emit_label_after (rtx label, rtx after) { - /* This can be called twice for the same label - as a result of the confusion that follows a syntax error! - So make it harmless. */ - if (INSN_UID (label) == 0) - { - INSN_UID (label) = cur_insn_uid++; - add_insn_after (label, after, NULL); - } - + gcc_checking_assert (INSN_UID (label) == 0); + INSN_UID (label) = cur_insn_uid++; + add_insn_after (label, after, NULL); return label; } @@ -4811,14 +4800,9 @@ emit_call_insn (rtx x) rtx emit_label (rtx label) { - /* This can be called twice for the same label - as a result of the confusion that follows a syntax error! - So make it harmless. */ - if (INSN_UID (label) == 0) - { - INSN_UID (label) = cur_insn_uid++; - add_insn (label); - } + gcc_checking_assert (INSN_UID (label) == 0); + INSN_UID (label) = cur_insn_uid++; + add_insn (label); return label; }