On 07/29/2009 12:28 AM, Martin Jambor wrote:
That is not really true.
Whee. I guess I really didn't understand what was going on.
At present I'm testing the following minimal patch to fix
the double lookup problem I mentioned. It's uglier than
it ought to be because of incorrect indentation in the
original.
r~
--- tree-inline.c (revision 150180)
+++ tree-inline.c (local)
@@ -1496,67 +1496,69 @@ copy_bb (copy_body_data *id, basic_block
callgraph edges and update or duplicate them. */
if (is_gimple_call (stmt))
{
- struct cgraph_edge *edge = cgraph_edge (id->src_node, orig_stmt);
+ struct cgraph_edge *edge;
int flags;
switch (id->transform_call_graph_edges)
{
- case CB_CGE_DUPLICATE:
- if (edge)
- cgraph_clone_edge (edge, id->dst_node, stmt,
- REG_BR_PROB_BASE, 1,
- edge->frequency, true);
- break;
-
- case CB_CGE_MOVE_CLONES:
- cgraph_set_call_stmt_including_clones (id->dst_node, orig_stmt,
stmt);
- break;
-
- case CB_CGE_MOVE:
- if (edge)
- cgraph_set_call_stmt (edge, stmt);
- break;
+ case CB_CGE_DUPLICATE:
+ edge = cgraph_edge (id->src_node, orig_stmt);
+ if (edge)
+ edge = cgraph_clone_edge (edge, id->dst_node, stmt,
+ REG_BR_PROB_BASE, 1,
+ edge->frequency, true);
+ break;
+
+ case CB_CGE_MOVE_CLONES:
+ cgraph_set_call_stmt_including_clones (id->dst_node,
+ orig_stmt, stmt);
+ edge = cgraph_edge (id->dst_node, stmt);
+ break;
+
+ case CB_CGE_MOVE:
+ edge = cgraph_edge (id->dst_node, orig_stmt);
+ if (edge)
+ cgraph_set_call_stmt (edge, stmt);
+ break;
- default:
- gcc_unreachable ();
+ default:
+ gcc_unreachable ();
}
- edge = cgraph_edge (id->src_node, orig_stmt);
- /* Constant propagation on argument done during inlining
- may create new direct call. Produce an edge for it. */
- if ((!edge
- || (edge->indirect_call
- && id->transform_call_graph_edges == CB_CGE_MOVE_CLONES))
- && is_gimple_call (stmt)
- && (fn = gimple_call_fndecl (stmt)) != NULL)
- {
- struct cgraph_node *dest = cgraph_node (fn);
+ /* Constant propagation on argument done during inlining
+ may create new direct call. Produce an edge for it. */
+ if ((!edge
+ || (edge->indirect_call
+ && id->transform_call_graph_edges == CB_CGE_MOVE_CLONES))
+ && is_gimple_call (stmt)
+ && (fn = gimple_call_fndecl (stmt)) != NULL)
+ {
+ struct cgraph_node *dest = cgraph_node (fn);
- /* We have missing edge in the callgraph. This can happen in
one case
- where previous inlining turned indirect call into direct
call by
- constant propagating arguments. In all other cases we hit a
bug
- (incorrect node sharing is most common reason for missing
edges. */
- gcc_assert (dest->needed || !dest->analyzed);
- if (id->transform_call_graph_edges == CB_CGE_MOVE_CLONES)
- cgraph_create_edge_including_clones (id->dst_node, dest, stmt,
- bb->count,
-
compute_call_stmt_bb_frequency (id->dst_node->decl, bb),
- bb->loop_depth,
-
CIF_ORIGINALLY_INDIRECT_CALL);
- else
- cgraph_create_edge (id->dst_node, dest, stmt,
- bb->count, CGRAPH_FREQ_BASE,
- bb->loop_depth)->inline_failed
- = CIF_ORIGINALLY_INDIRECT_CALL;
- if (dump_file)
- {
- fprintf (dump_file, "Created new direct edge to %s",
- cgraph_node_name (dest));
- }
- }
+ /* We have missing edge in the callgraph. This can happen
+ when previous inlining turned an indirect call into a
+ direct call by constant propagating arguments. In all
+ other cases we hit a bug (incorrect node sharing is the
+ most common reason for missing edges). */
+ gcc_assert (dest->needed || !dest->analyzed);
+ if (id->transform_call_graph_edges == CB_CGE_MOVE_CLONES)
+ cgraph_create_edge_including_clones
+ (id->dst_node, dest, stmt, bb->count,
+ compute_call_stmt_bb_frequency (id->dst_node->decl, bb),
+ bb->loop_depth, CIF_ORIGINALLY_INDIRECT_CALL);
+ else
+ cgraph_create_edge (id->dst_node, dest, stmt,
+ bb->count, CGRAPH_FREQ_BASE,
+ bb->loop_depth)->inline_failed
+ = CIF_ORIGINALLY_INDIRECT_CALL;
+ if (dump_file)
+ {
+ fprintf (dump_file, "Created new direct edge to %s",
+ cgraph_node_name (dest));
+ }
+ }
flags = gimple_call_flags (stmt);
-
if (flags & ECF_MAY_BE_ALLOCA)
cfun->calls_alloca = true;
if (flags & ECF_RETURNS_TWICE)
