OK. Sorry about dropping the balli on a review. I thought it had already been approved and committed.
-- steve On Fri, Sep 13, 2024 at 12:19:48PM +0200, Mikael Morin wrote: > Ping: > > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2024-July/060640.html > > Maybe I could argue that I can self approve, as the patch is a partial > revert an old patch of mine: > > https://gcc.gnu.org/r180889 > > Le 07/07/2024 à 11:00, Mikael Morin a écrit : > > Hello, > > > > this is another small cleanup I had lying around. > > Regression-tested on x86_64-linux. Ok for master? > > > > -- 8< -- > > > > Remove the special handling of end of nested scalarization chains, which > > advanced the chain to an element of a parent chain when the current one > > was reaching its end. > > > > That handling was superfluous as nested chains correspond to nested > > scalarizations of subexpressions and the scalarizations don't extend beyond > > their associated subexpression and don't use any scalarisation element from > > the parent expression. > > > > No change of behaviour, as the GFC_SE struct is supposed to be in its final > > state anyway when the last element from the chain has been consumed. > > > > gcc/fortran/ChangeLog: > > > > * trans-expr.cc (gfc_advance_se_ss_chain): Don't use an element > > from the parent scalarization chain when the current chain reaches > > its end. > > --- > > gcc/fortran/trans-expr.cc | 11 +---------- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 10 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.cc b/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.cc > > index 477c2720187..f0862db5f17 100644 > > --- a/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.cc > > +++ b/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.cc > > @@ -2052,7 +2052,6 @@ void > > gfc_advance_se_ss_chain (gfc_se * se) > > { > > gfc_se *p; > > - gfc_ss *ss; > > gcc_assert (se != NULL && se->ss != NULL && se->ss != > > gfc_ss_terminator); > > @@ -2064,15 +2063,7 @@ gfc_advance_se_ss_chain (gfc_se * se) > > gcc_assert (p->parent == NULL || p->parent->ss == p->ss > > || p->parent->ss->nested_ss == p->ss); > > - /* If we were in a nested loop, the next scalarized expression can be > > - on the parent ss' next pointer. Thus we should not take the next > > - pointer blindly, but rather go up one nest level as long as next > > - is the end of chain. */ > > - ss = p->ss; > > - while (ss->next == gfc_ss_terminator && ss->parent != NULL) > > - ss = ss->parent; > > - > > - p->ss = ss->next; > > + p->ss = p->ss->next; > > p = p->parent; > > } -- Steve
