https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84272
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Thomas Preud'homme from comment #7)
> Hi Jakub,
>
> First of all, thanks for beating me to it. Wanted to look at it but am
> fighting strong headache since Wednesday.
>
> Regarding the second patch, I believe it is the right approach but found
> another bug in the surrounding lines which I think should be fixed in the
> same patch:
>
> /* Absence of children might indicate an alternate root of a
> *chain*.
> It's ok to skip it here as the chain will be renamed when
> processing the canonical root for that chain. */
> if (node->get_children ()->empty ())
> continue;
>
> Comment 1: I advocate removing this block altogether.
Agreed. After all, what that skips over is:
for (child_iter = node->get_children ()->begin ();
child_iter != node->get_children ()->end (); child_iter++)
to_process.safe_push (*child_iter);
if (free)
{
if (node->root_p ())
delete static_cast<fma_root_node *> (node);
else
delete node;
}
where the for loop will do nothing if node->get_children ()->empty () and the
freeing, which needs to be done too.
> Comment 2: Explain why deferred freeing is necessary on top of the line
> adding the node to to_free.
>
> Something along the lines of:
>
> /* Defer freeing so that the process_node callback can access the parent
> and children of the node being processed. */
Ok.
