> Because reorder_insns doesn't handle the case of moving a barrier into a
> middle of basic block.
Right, I should have read the audit trail. :-) The patch is OK then, but add
a ??? note at the end of the comment saying that the proper thing to do here
is probably not to run cleanup_barrier fo
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 09:25:32AM +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > Yes, they do, that is why it crashed during final.
>
> OK. Why wouldn't it work to call reorder_insns instead of reorder_insns_nobb?
Because reorder_insns doesn't handle the case of moving a barrier into a
middle of basic block.
> Yes, they do, that is why it crashed during final.
OK. Why wouldn't it work to call reorder_insns instead of reorder_insns_nobb?
--
Eric Botcazou
On 01/26/15 06:34, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 01:11:01PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
I agree that freeing the cfg and immediately computing it again doesn't make
sense, but I just don't see this patch being incompatible with that.
I wonder if handing over pass pipeline contr
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 01:11:01PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > I agree that freeing the cfg and immediately computing it again doesn't make
> > sense, but I just don't see this patch being incompatible with that.
>
> I wonder if handing over pass pipeline control to targets at
> machine_reorg
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 12:47 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 12:35:30PM +0100, Steven Bosscher wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:11 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> > On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:06:05AM +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> >> > While the cleanup_barriers runs after clea
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 12:35:30PM +0100, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:11 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:06:05AM +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> >> > While the cleanup_barriers runs after cleaning up BLOCK_FOR_INSNs,
> >> > some targets like i?86/x86_64
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:11 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:06:05AM +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> > While the cleanup_barriers runs after cleaning up BLOCK_FOR_INSNs,
>> > some targets like i?86/x86_64 choose to populate it again during machine
>> > reorg and some target do
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:11:00AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:06:05AM +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > > While the cleanup_barriers runs after cleaning up BLOCK_FOR_INSNs,
> > > some targets like i?86/x86_64 choose to populate it again during machine
> > > reorg and som
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:06:05AM +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > While the cleanup_barriers runs after cleaning up BLOCK_FOR_INSNs,
> > some targets like i?86/x86_64 choose to populate it again during machine
> > reorg and some target don't free it at the end of machine reorg.
> > This patch upda
> While the cleanup_barriers runs after cleaning up BLOCK_FOR_INSNs,
> some targets like i?86/x86_64 choose to populate it again during machine
> reorg and some target don't free it at the end of machine reorg.
> This patch updates cleanup_barrier pass, so that it adjusts basic block
> boundaries a
Hi!
While the cleanup_barriers runs after cleaning up BLOCK_FOR_INSNs,
some targets like i?86/x86_64 choose to populate it again during machine
reorg and some target don't free it at the end of machine reorg.
This patch updates cleanup_barrier pass, so that it adjusts basic block
boundaries and BL
12 matches
Mail list logo
