On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 2:36 AM, Richard Guenther <richard.guent...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:20 PM, Xinliang David Li <davi...@google.com> wrote: >>> >>> Your patch doesn't really improve this but adds to the confusion. >>> >>> + /* Override dump TODOs. */ >>> + if (dump_file && (pass->todo_flags_finish & TODO_dump_func) >>> + && (dump_flags & TDF_BEFORE)) >>> + { >>> + pass->todo_flags_finish &= ~TODO_dump_func; >>> + pass->todo_flags_start |= TODO_dump_func; >>> + } >>> >>> and certainly writing to pass is not ok. And the TDF_BEFORE flag >>> looks misplaced as it controls TODOs, not dumping behavior. >>> Yes, it's a mess right now but the above looks like a hack ontop >>> of that mess (maybe because of it, but well ...). >>> >> >> How about removing dumping TODO completely -- this can be done easily >> -- I don't understand why pass wants extra control on the dumping if >> user already asked for dumping -- it is annoying to see empty IR dump >> for a pass when I want to see it. >> >>> At least I would have expected to also get the dump after the >>> pass, not only the one before it with this dump flag. >>> >>> Now, why can't you look at the previous pass output for the >>> before-dump (as I do usually)? >> >> For one thing, you need to either remember what is the previous pass, >> or dump all passes which for large files can take very long time. Even >> with all the dumps, you will need to eyeballing to find the previous >> pass which may or may not have the IR dumped. >> >> How about removing dump TODO? > > Yeah, I think this would go in the right direction. Currently some passes > do not dump function bodies because they presumably do no IL > modification. But this is certainly the minority (and some passes do not > dump bodies even though they are modifying the IL ...). > > So I'd say we should by default dump function bodies. > > Note that there are three useful dumping positions (maybe four), > before todo-start, after todo-start, before todo-finish and after todo-finish. > By default we'd want after todo-finish. When we no longer dump via > a TODO then we could indeed use dump-flags to control this > (maybe -original for the body before todo-start). > > What to others think?
I think that is a very good thing to have. David > > Richard. > >> Thanks, >> >> David >> >> >>> >>> Richard. >>> >> >