On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 4:48 PM, Thomas Schwinge
wrote:
> Hi Richard!
>
> On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 13:25:01 +0200, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 1:19 PM, Thomas Schwinge
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 10:18:35 +0200, Richard Biener
>> > wrote:
>> >> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Thomas Schwinge
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > --- gcc/tree-streamer.c
>> >> > +++ gcc/tree-streamer.c
>> >> > @@ -278,9 +278,23 @@ record_common_node (struct streamer_tree_cache_d
>> >> > *cache, tree node)
>> >> >streamer_tree_cache_append (cache, node, cache->nodes.length ());
>> >> >
>> >> >if (POINTER_TYPE_P (node)
>> >> > - || TREE_CODE (node) == COMPLEX_TYPE
>> >> >|| TREE_CODE (node) == ARRAY_TYPE)
>> >> > record_common_node (cache, TREE_TYPE (node));
>> >> > + else if (TREE_CODE (node) == COMPLEX_TYPE)
>> >> > [...]
>> >> >else if (TREE_CODE (node) == RECORD_TYPE)
>
>> [looks to me we miss handling of vector type components alltogether,
>> maybe there are no global vector type trees ...]
>
> Looks like it, yes. Would a patch like the following be reasonable,
> which explicitly lists/handles all expected tree codes, or is something
> like that not feasible? (That's a subset of tree codes I gathered by a
> partial run of the GCC testsuite, and libgomp testsuite; not claiming
> this is complete.)
I think it would be a nice thing to have indeed.
So -- I'm inclined to approve this patch ;)
Thanks,
Richard.
> commit f28dd9618be8a26c6a75ee089f1755e4e0281106
> Author: Thomas Schwinge
> Date: Thu Sep 29 16:35:19 2016 +0200
>
> Explicitly list all tree codes in gcc/tree-streamer.c:record_common_node
> ---
> gcc/tree-streamer.c | 32 +---
> 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git gcc/tree-streamer.c gcc/tree-streamer.c
> index 6ada89a..8567a81 100644
> --- gcc/tree-streamer.c
> +++ gcc/tree-streamer.c
> @@ -303,17 +303,32 @@ record_common_node (struct streamer_tree_cache_d
> *cache, tree node)
> in the cache as hash value. */
>streamer_tree_cache_append (cache, node, cache->nodes.length ());
>
> - if (POINTER_TYPE_P (node)
> - || TREE_CODE (node) == ARRAY_TYPE)
> -record_common_node (cache, TREE_TYPE (node));
> - else if (TREE_CODE (node) == COMPLEX_TYPE)
> + switch (TREE_CODE (node))
> {
> +case ERROR_MARK:
> +case FIELD_DECL:
> +case FIXED_POINT_TYPE:
> +case IDENTIFIER_NODE:
> +case INTEGER_CST:
> +case INTEGER_TYPE:
> +case POINTER_BOUNDS_TYPE:
> +case REAL_TYPE:
> +case TREE_LIST:
> +case VOID_CST:
> +case VOID_TYPE:
> + /* No recursion. */
> + break;
> +case POINTER_TYPE:
> +case REFERENCE_TYPE:
> +case ARRAY_TYPE:
> + record_common_node (cache, TREE_TYPE (node));
> + break;
> +case COMPLEX_TYPE:
>/* Verify that a complex type's component type (node_type) has been
> handled already (and we thus don't need to recurse here). */
>verify_common_node_recorded (cache, TREE_TYPE (node));
> -}
> - else if (TREE_CODE (node) == RECORD_TYPE)
> -{
> + break;
> +case RECORD_TYPE:
>/* The FIELD_DECLs of structures should be shared, so that every
> COMPONENT_REF uses the same tree node when referencing a field.
> Pointer equality between FIELD_DECLs is used by the alias
> @@ -322,6 +337,9 @@ record_common_node (struct streamer_tree_cache_d *cache,
> tree node)
> nonoverlapping_component_refs_of_decl_p). */
>for (tree f = TYPE_FIELDS (node); f; f = TREE_CHAIN (f))
> record_common_node (cache, f);
> + break;
> +default:
> + gcc_unreachable ();
> }
> }
>
>
>
> Grüße
> Thomas
