Are there plans to maintain the CFG througout the compilation?

[Peter Garbett]

I would like to analyse code using the GCC CFG, however,
some steps invalidate it notably delay slot scheduling.

Are there plans to move toward "how it ought to work" as outlined in :

http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/basic_block_graph



Peter.

Re: Are there plans to maintain the CFG througout the compilation?

[Peter Garbett]

Thanks Ian.

Any idea what the size of the problem would be , perhaps first for
backends  that don't chose to vandalise things themselves 1st?

backported fix to fold-const.c breaks gcc 4.6

[Peter Garbett]

Well, at least with my cross it does.

this change, or something like it:

http://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commitdiff;h=09a77c2ea0b41fdff8820cbcbe41b35762db5c45

introduces a reference to TS_TYPED into the 4.6 branch for
fold-const.c, and it isnt defined,
or at least neither I nor my compiler can find it.


Any helpful hints on how to proceed?

Re: backported fix to fold-const.c breaks gcc 4.6

[Peter Garbett]

Thanks for the prompt and indeed  helpful hint.

I'll comment the offending line out locally for now.


On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 9:08 AM, Richard Guenther
 wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 10:00 AM, Peter Garbett
>  wrote:
>> Well, at least with my cross it does.
>>
>> this change, or something like it:
>>
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commitdiff;h=09a77c2ea0b41fdff8820cbcbe41b35762db5c45
>>
>> introduces a reference to TS_TYPED into the 4.6 branch for
>> fold-const.c, and it isnt defined,
>> or at least neither I nor my compiler can find it.
>>
>>
>> Any helpful hints on how to proceed?
>
> That backport looks bogus and should be reverted.
>
> Richard.

Re: Debugging incorrect generation of RTL

[Peter Garbett]

I suspect  the assertion in set_last_insn in emit-rtl.h is giving me
false positives.