> So sorry to be awkward, but I don't think this is the way to go. I think > we'll just end up playing whack-a-mole and adding df_note_add_problem to > lots of passes.
We have doing that for the past 15 years though, so what has changed? > (FTR, I'm not saying passes have to avoid false negatives, just false > positives. If a pass updates an instruction with a REG_UNUSED note, > and the pass is no longer sure whether the register is unused or not, > the pass can just delete the note.) Reintroducing the manual management of such notes would be a step backward. -- Eric Botcazou
