On Thu, 25 Jan 2018, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 11:20:33PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > Hi! > > > > The r241060 change added the second hunk in this patch which the patch is > > reverting. The problem is that not deleting some unmarked insns in > > delete_unmarked_insns is done in a wrong place, it causes indeed not to > > delete the instruction we don't want to DCE, but the instructions that > > are needed by the instructions (in this case a memory load whose result > > the REG_CFA_RESTORE instruction uses) are not marked either and those are > > deleted. > > > > The following patch fixes it by making such instructions non-deletable, > > which means they are marked and the DCE algorithm then marks the > > instructions they need too. > > Looks good to me! Thanks. And sorry for causing the bug in the first > place :-/
Ok. Richard.
