Hi, On Fri, 26 Oct 2012, Dehao Chen wrote:
> 1. abandon the changes in cfgexpand.c Well, you merely moved the bogus code to gimple-low.c. It is bogus because you unconditionally overwrite TREE_BLOCK of all operands (and all operands operands) with the statements block. I assume the unit-test you added shows the problem you were trying to fix? >From the scan-assembler-no directive I'm not really sure what exactly the problem is you're seeing. Can you try to describe it with words for the example code? Which operands has no tree-block where it should have one, or which one has the wrong tree-block? Ciao, Michael.
