On 23/09/2007, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/23/07, Manuel López-Ibáñez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 23/09/2007, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 9/23/07, Manuel López-Ibáñez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Am I wrong? I have the same problem when I try to enable SSA at O0 and
> > > > my current solution is the dummy pass.
> > >
> > > Right, a dummy pass after salias works.
> > >
> >
> > And *before* salias? Does it make a difference? It suits me better for
> > my purposes.
>
> No, after salias you need to run rebuild_alias. And for efficiency you'd
> of course remove the TODO from salias itself.
>
I am not so concerned about efficiency ATM, I am trying to build SSA at O0.
Anyway, it doesn't work, verify_ssa fails with
/home/manuel/src/trunk/libgcc/../gcc/libgcc2.c: In function '__negti2':
/home/manuel/src/trunk/libgcc/../gcc/libgcc2.c:74: error: found real
variable when subvariables should have appeared
while verifying SSA_NAME uu_12 in statement
# SFT.21 = VDEF <SFT.21>
# SFT.22 = VDEF <SFT.22>
# SFT.23 = VDEF <SFT.23>
uu = {};
and
/home/manuel/src/trunk/libgcc/../gcc/libgcc2.c:74: error: expected an
SSA_NAME object
/home/manuel/src/trunk/libgcc/../gcc/libgcc2.c:74: error: in statement
# SFT.21 = VDEF <SFT.21>
# SFT.22 = VDEF <SFT.22>
# SFT.23 = VDEF <SFT.23> { SFT.21 SFT.22 SFT.23 }
uu = {};
:-(
Manuel.
