Re: [PATCH, RFC] Add a pass counter for "are we there yet" purposes

2017-10-23 Thread Richard Biener
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 12:18 PM, Martin Jambor wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 06:15:06PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: >> I guess that might help. I have the feeling that querying for 'did >> pass X run' is wrong conceptually. > > The reason why I liked the idea is that

Re: [PATCH, RFC] Add a pass counter for "are we there yet" purposes

2017-10-23 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 12:18:58PM +0200, Martin Jambor wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 06:15:06PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > > I guess that might help. I have the feeling that querying for 'did > > pass X run' is wrong conceptually. > > The reason why I liked the idea is that I

Re: [PATCH, RFC] Add a pass counter for "are we there yet" purposes

2017-10-23 Thread Martin Jambor
Hi, On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 06:15:06PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > I guess that might help. I have the feeling that querying for 'did > pass X run' is wrong conceptually. The reason why I liked the idea is that I could unify SRA and early-SRA passes and their behavior would only differ

Re: [PATCH, RFC] Add a pass counter for "are we there yet" purposes

2017-10-19 Thread Sandra Loosemore
On 10/16/2017 10:15 AM, Richard Biener wrote: On October 16, 2017 5:46:35 PM GMT+02:00, Sandra Loosemore wrote: On 10/16/2017 12:53 AM, Richard Biener wrote: On October 16, 2017 7:38:50 AM GMT+02:00, Sandra Loosemore wrote: This patch is a

Re: [PATCH, RFC] Add a pass counter for "are we there yet" purposes

2017-10-16 Thread Richard Biener
On October 16, 2017 5:46:35 PM GMT+02:00, Sandra Loosemore wrote: >On 10/16/2017 12:53 AM, Richard Biener wrote: >> On October 16, 2017 7:38:50 AM GMT+02:00, Sandra Loosemore > wrote: >>> This patch is a first cut at solving the problem discussed

Re: [PATCH, RFC] Add a pass counter for "are we there yet" purposes

2017-10-16 Thread Sandra Loosemore
On 10/16/2017 12:53 AM, Richard Biener wrote: On October 16, 2017 7:38:50 AM GMT+02:00, Sandra Loosemore wrote: This patch is a first cut at solving the problem discussed in this thread https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2017-10/msg00016.html where I have some nios2 backend

Re: [PATCH, RFC] Add a pass counter for "are we there yet" purposes

2017-10-16 Thread Richard Biener
On October 16, 2017 7:38:50 AM GMT+02:00, Sandra Loosemore wrote: >This patch is a first cut at solving the problem discussed in this >thread > >https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2017-10/msg00016.html > >where I have some nios2 backend patches in my queue that need a way of

[PATCH, RFC] Add a pass counter for "are we there yet" purposes

2017-10-15 Thread Sandra Loosemore
This patch is a first cut at solving the problem discussed in this thread https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2017-10/msg00016.html where I have some nios2 backend patches in my queue that need a way of knowing whether the split1 pass has run yet. There seemed to be agreement that a general way to