Tag 'gcc/gimple-expr.cc:mark_addressable_2' as 'static' (was: [PR67891] drop is_gimple_reg test from set_parm_rtl)

2022-10-17 Thread Thomas Schwinge
Hi! On 2015-11-03T02:29:41-0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > Thanks, here's the patch as just installed. > --- a/gcc/gimple-expr.c > +++ b/gcc/gimple-expr.c > +static void > +mark_addressable_1 (tree x) > +{ > + [...] > +} > + > +/* Adaptor for mark_addressable_1 for use in hash_set traversal. *

Re: [PR67891] drop is_gimple_reg test from set_parm_rtl

2015-11-02 Thread Alexandre Oliva
On Nov 3, 2015, Jeff Law wrote: > On 11/02/2015 06:11 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote: >> On Oct 14, 2015, Richard Biener wrote: >>> It looks ok to me but lacks a comment in mark_addressable_1 why we >>> do this queueing when currently expanding to RTL. >> +/* Mark X as addressable or queue it

Re: [PR67891] drop is_gimple_reg test from set_parm_rtl

2015-11-02 Thread Jeff Law
On 11/02/2015 06:11 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote: On Oct 14, 2015, Richard Biener wrote: On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 5:25 AM, Alexandre Oliva wrote: On Oct 12, 2015, Richard Biener wrote: On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 3:16 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote: On Oct 9, 2015, Richard Biener wrote: Ok. Not

Re: [PR67891] drop is_gimple_reg test from set_parm_rtl

2015-11-02 Thread Alexandre Oliva
On Oct 14, 2015, Richard Biener wrote: > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 5:25 AM, Alexandre Oliva wrote: >> On Oct 12, 2015, Richard Biener wrote: >> >>> On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 3:16 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote: On Oct 9, 2015, Richard Biener wrote: > Ok. Note that I think emit_block_

Re: [PR67891] drop is_gimple_reg test from set_parm_rtl

2015-10-14 Thread Richard Biener
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 5:25 AM, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Oct 12, 2015, Richard Biener wrote: > >> On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 3:16 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote: >>> On Oct 9, 2015, Richard Biener wrote: >>> Ok. Note that I think emit_block_move shouldn't mess with the addressable flag

Re: [PR67891] drop is_gimple_reg test from set_parm_rtl

2015-10-13 Thread Alexandre Oliva
On Oct 12, 2015, Richard Biener wrote: > On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 3:16 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote: >> On Oct 9, 2015, Richard Biener wrote: >> >>> Ok. Note that I think emit_block_move shouldn't mess with the addressable >>> flag. >> >> I have successfully tested a patch that stops it from d

Re: [PR67891] drop is_gimple_reg test from set_parm_rtl

2015-10-12 Thread Richard Biener
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 3:16 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Oct 9, 2015, Richard Biener wrote: > >> Ok. Note that I think emit_block_move shouldn't mess with the addressable >> flag. > > I have successfully tested a patch that stops it from doing so, > reverting https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/s

Re: [PR67891] drop is_gimple_reg test from set_parm_rtl

2015-10-10 Thread Alexandre Oliva
On Oct 9, 2015, Richard Biener wrote: > Ok. Note that I think emit_block_move shouldn't mess with the addressable > flag. I have successfully tested a patch that stops it from doing so, reverting https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49429#c11 but according to bugs 49429 and 49454, it

Re: [PR67891] drop is_gimple_reg test from set_parm_rtl (was: [PR67766] reorder return value copying from PARALLELs and CONCATs)

2015-10-09 Thread Richard Biener
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 9:33 AM, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Oct 9, 2015, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > >> This fixes fallout from the PR64164 expander revamp. > >> Uroš kindly tested with an alpha-linux-gnu regstrap. > > The one regression he mentioned from that run was gcc.dg/pr43300.c. The > vecto

[PR67891] drop is_gimple_reg test from set_parm_rtl (was: [PR67766] reorder return value copying from PARALLELs and CONCATs)

2015-10-09 Thread Alexandre Oliva
On Oct 9, 2015, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > This fixes fallout from the PR64164 expander revamp. > Uroš kindly tested with an alpha-linux-gnu regstrap. The one regression he mentioned from that run was gcc.dg/pr43300.c. The vector parameter there is handled by the emit_block_move case of assign_