On Fri, Jun 6, 2025 at 2:08 AM Vineet Gupta <vine...@rivosinc.com> wrote: > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > * emit-rtl.cc (next_nonnote_nondebug_insn): Update comments. > > Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta <vine...@rivosinc.com> > --- > gcc/emit-rtl.cc | 6 +++++- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/gcc/emit-rtl.cc b/gcc/emit-rtl.cc > index 3f453cda67ed..65e0f1e6d8d6 100644 > --- a/gcc/emit-rtl.cc > +++ b/gcc/emit-rtl.cc > @@ -3689,7 +3689,11 @@ next_nonnote_nondebug_insn (rtx_insn *insn) > > /* Return the next insn after INSN that is not a NOTE nor DEBUG_INSN, > but stop the search before we enter another basic block. This > - routine does not look inside SEQUENCEs. */ > + routine does not look inside SEQUENCEs. > + NOTE: This can potentially bleed into next BB. If current insn is > + last insn of BB, followed by a code_label before the start of > + the next BB, code_label will be returned. But this is the > + behavior rest of gcc assumes/relies on e.g. get_last_bb_insn. */
To me this shows while a nice try, the abstraction this function provides is not too useful? > rtx_insn * > next_nonnote_nondebug_insn_bb (rtx_insn *insn) > -- > 2.43.0 >
