On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 1:29 PM Eric Botcazou wrote:
>
> > So it breaks PR93199 again?
>
> Indeed, although there is no regression in the testsuite AFAICS.
Yeah, too big of a testcase ...
> I guess that
> we can do the new walk before and not instead of the post-order traversal.
>
> Revised pat
> So it breaks PR93199 again?
Indeed, although there is no regression in the testsuite AFAICS. I guess that
we can do the new walk before and not instead of the post-order traversal.
Revised patch attached, same ChangeLog.
--
Eric Botcazoudiff --git a/gcc/tree-eh.c b/gcc/tree-eh.c
index 4246d
On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 10:36:20AM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> This was recently changed to use another order and this trivially breaks
> testcases with nested regions like the attached one. So the attached patch
> restores the post-order traversal and it also contains a small tweak to the
>
Hi,
the cleanup_all_empty_eh function was originally doing a post-order traversal
of the EH region tree to optimize it:
/* Do a post-order traversal of the EH region tree. Examine each
post_landing_pad block and see if we can eliminate it as empty. */
That's sensible since the worker funct
