Richard Guenther writes:
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 4:06 PM, Paulo J. Matos wrote:
>>
>> Or I could move the pass to be executed before the CFG is created. Would
>> there be any issues with this?
>
> Yes. Profile information is not available at that point.
>
Thanks. Makes sense if I intend to u
On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 4:06 PM, Paulo J. Matos wrote:
> Richard Guenther writes:
>
>>
>> Which is wrong. You need to use block_stmt_iterator and
>> bsi_remove and ... (I don't remember, 4.3 is so old).
>>
>
> Or I could move the pass to be executed before the CFG is created. Would
> there be an
Richard Guenther writes:
>
> Which is wrong. You need to use block_stmt_iterator and
> bsi_remove and ... (I don't remember, 4.3 is so old).
>
Or I could move the pass to be executed before the CFG is created. Would
there be any issues with this?
Regarding passes execution order. It seems on o
Richard Guenther writes:
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 3:15 PM, Paulo J. Matos wrote:
>
> Which is wrong. You need to use block_stmt_iterator and
> bsi_remove and ... (I don't remember, 4.3 is so old).
>
Thanks for the pointers. I will use those instead.
>
> You need to properly update the CFG
>
On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 3:15 PM, Paulo J. Matos wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am working on the new pass (previously discussed), to optimise switch
> cases.
>
> I am almost finishing it, however, for practical reasons I am
> implementing it first over GCC4.3 and once tested, will port it to svn
> trunk an
