On July 8, 2016 4:23:31 PM GMT+02:00, "Martin Liška" wrote:
>On 07/07/2016 04:15 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>> I think it's fine though the inliners initializer handling looks
>> incredibly fragile to me ;)
>>
>> Richard.
>
>OK, installed in trunk. May I install the patch to all active branches?
>
On 07/07/2016 04:15 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> I think it's fine though the inliners initializer handling looks
> incredibly fragile to me ;)
>
> Richard.
OK, installed in trunk. May I install the patch to all active branches?
Reg&bootstrap works for all of them.
On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 07/01/2016 12:15 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>> IMHO using fold-convert in this case is bogus and ideally the testcase
>> should have been diagnosed.
>>
>> fold_convertible_p has a comment
>>
>> /* Returns true, if ARG is convertible to TYPE u
On 07/01/2016 12:15 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> IMHO using fold-convert in this case is bogus and ideally the testcase
> should have been diagnosed.
>
> fold_convertible_p has a comment
>
> /* Returns true, if ARG is convertible to TYPE using a NOP_EXPR. *
>
> but clearly it isn't generating ju
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 1:14 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> The gimplifier has been changed recently to use anonymous SSA_NAMEs instead
>> of temporary decls.
>
> But the PR is a regression present since GCC 4.7...
>
>> And the gimplifier uses save_expr (which is a gimplifier function BTW) on
>> both
> The gimplifier has been changed recently to use anonymous SSA_NAMEs instead
> of temporary decls.
But the PR is a regression present since GCC 4.7...
> And the gimplifier uses save_expr (which is a gimplifier function BTW) on
> both not gimplified at all as well as partially gimplified trees.
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 12:41:53PM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > This is candidate patch for the PR, which do not create SAVE_EXPR trees for
> > already assigned SSA_NAMEs.
> >
> > Patch survives reg&bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu.
> >
> > Thoughts?
>
> This looks like a layering violation, sav
> This is candidate patch for the PR, which do not create SAVE_EXPR trees for
> already assigned SSA_NAMEs.
>
> Patch survives reg&bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu.
>
> Thoughts?
This looks like a layering violation, save_expr is a GENERIC thing so invoking
it on an SSA_NAME is weird. How does th
2016 18:07:55 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Do not emit SAVE_EXPR for already assigned SSA_NAMEs
(PR71606).
gcc/ChangeLog:
2016-06-22 Martin Liska
PR middle-end/71606
* tree.c (save_expr): Do not generate SAVE_EXPR if the
argument is already an assigned SSA_NAME.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
201