On 11/11/2014 12:11 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 10:08:54PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
@@ -662,9 +662,49 @@ func_checker::compare_gimple_call (gimpl
t1 = gimple_call_fndecl (s1);
t2 = gimple_call_fndecl (s2);
Just drop these and compare gimple_call_fn only.
+
On November 10, 2014 9:45:27 PM CET, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi!
As the following two testcases shows, there are lots of issues in
ICF compare_gimple_call, in particular, it doesn't handle indirect
calls
properly (see the ipa-icf-31.c testcase), doesn't handle internal calls
Hi!
As the following two testcases shows, there are lots of issues in
ICF compare_gimple_call, in particular, it doesn't handle indirect calls
properly (see the ipa-icf-31.c testcase), doesn't handle internal calls
properly (see ubsan/ipa-icf-1.c), didn't check gimple_call flags at all.
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 10:08:54PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
@@ -662,9 +662,49 @@ func_checker::compare_gimple_call (gimpl
t1 = gimple_call_fndecl (s1);
t2 = gimple_call_fndecl (s2);
Just drop these and compare gimple_call_fn only.
+ tree chain1 = gimple_call_chain (s1);
+
Hi!
As the following two testcases shows, there are lots of issues in
ICF compare_gimple_call, in particular, it doesn't handle indirect calls
properly (see the ipa-icf-31.c testcase), doesn't handle internal calls
properly (see ubsan/ipa-icf-1.c), didn't check gimple_call flags at all.
As
