ok for google branches. David
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 2:05 PM, <tmsri...@google.com> wrote: > I have uploaded a new patch set with all the mentioned changes made. If > a function has the target attribute it will not be touched by the > autoclone pass. > > Also fixed some test cases which were broken because the clone names > used '_' instead of '.' for suffixing. > > > On 2011/12/16 19:39:47, davidxl wrote: >> >> http://codereview.appspot.com/5490054/diff/1011/config/i386/i386.c >> File config/i386/i386.c (right): > > > > http://codereview.appspot.com/5490054/diff/1011/config/i386/i386.c#newcode26569 >> >> config/i386/i386.c:26569: +mversion_for_core2 (tree > > *optimization_node, >> >> -> mversionable_for_core2_p ? > > >> http://codereview.appspot.com/5490054/diff/1011/mversn-dispatch.c >> File mversn-dispatch.c (right): > > > > http://codereview.appspot.com/5490054/diff/1011/mversn-dispatch.c#newcode931 >> >> mversn-dispatch.c:931: DECL_STATIC_DESTRUCTOR (new_decl) = 0; >> Should you assert it instead? Should not clone ctor/dtors. > > > > http://codereview.appspot.com/5490054/diff/1011/mversn-dispatch.c#newcode2221 >> >> mversn-dispatch.c:2221: VEC_truncate (edge, EXIT_BLOCK_PTR->preds, 0); >> {} --> remove > > > > http://codereview.appspot.com/5490054/diff/1011/mversn-dispatch.c#newcode2389 >> >> mversn-dispatch.c:2389: >> How does it interact with manual multi-versioning from user? You > > probably don't >> >> want to clone functions that are marked with target attributes > > (explicitly -- >> >> not implied from command line). > > > > > http://codereview.appspot.com/5490054/
