Here is one the of follow up patches: support of -before_preparation,
-before, -after, -after_cleanup dump flags.
The default dumping behavior does not change at all, but if any one of
the above flags is specified, the function IR will be dumped into a
file with the corresponding suffix. The enh
Committed after Bootstrapping and regression testing on x86-64/linux.
The follow up patch will come soon.
Thanks,
David
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 6:58 AM, Richard Guenther
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Xinliang David Li
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 6:58 AM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
>> This is the revised patch as suggested.
>>
>> How does it look?
>
> }
>
> +static void
> +execute_function_dump (void *data ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
>
> function needs a comment.
>
>
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> This is the revised patch as suggested.
>
> How does it look?
}
+static void
+execute_function_dump (void *data ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
function needs a comment.
Ok with that change.
Please always specify how you tested the patch - the pa
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 1:52 AM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 5:47 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
>> See attached.
>
> Hmm. I don't like how you still wire dumping in the TODO routines.
> Doesn't it work to just dump the body from pass_fini_dump_file ()?
> Or if that doesn't so
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 5:47 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> See attached.
Hmm. I don't like how you still wire dumping in the TODO routines.
Doesn't it work to just dump the body from pass_fini_dump_file ()?
Or if that doesn't sound clean from (a subset of) places where it
is called? (we might wa
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 12:31 AM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> this is the patch that just removes the TODO_dump flag and forces it
> to dump. The original code cfun->last_verified = flags &
> TODO_verify_all looks weird -- depending on TODO_dump is set or not,
> the behavior of the update is differe
this is the patch that just removes the TODO_dump flag and forces it
to dump. The original code cfun->last_verified = flags &
TODO_verify_all looks weird -- depending on TODO_dump is set or not,
the behavior of the update is different (when no other todo flags is
set).
Ok for trunk?
David
On Wed
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 2:06 AM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 1:08 AM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
>> The following is the patch that does the job. Most of the changes are
>> just removing TODO_dump_func. The major change is in passes.c and
>> tree-pass.h.
>>
>> -fdump-xxx-yyy-st
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 2:06 AM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 1:08 AM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
>> The following is the patch that does the job. Most of the changes are
>> just removing TODO_dump_func. The major change is in passes.c and
>> tree-pass.h.
>>
>> -fdump-xxx-yyy-st
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 1:08 AM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> The following is the patch that does the job. Most of the changes are
> just removing TODO_dump_func. The major change is in passes.c and
> tree-pass.h.
>
> -fdump-xxx-yyy-start <-- dump before TODO_start
> -fdump-xxx-yyy-before
It might be also useful to implement the dumping behavior like this:
if any of the start/before/after/finish option is explicitly
specified, IR (and only IR) will be dumped into files suffixed with
.start/.before/.after/.finish. The debug dump will be dumped as usual
into the non suffixed file name
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 10:06, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 09:51, Xinliang David Li wrote:
>>> Any suggestions on the dump position specification string, before and
>>> after is not enough. How about
>>>
>>> start, bef
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 09:51, Xinliang David Li wrote:
>> Any suggestions on the dump position specification string, before and
>> after is not enough. How about
>>
>> start, before, after, and finish?
>>
>> I.e.
>>
>> -fdump-tree-pre-start
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 09:51, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> Any suggestions on the dump position specification string, before and
> after is not enough. How about
>
> start, before, after, and finish?
>
> I.e.
>
> -fdump-tree-pre-start --> dump IR before TODO_start of PRE pass
> -fdump-tree-pre-befor
Any suggestions on the dump position specification string, before and
after is not enough. How about
start, before, after, and finish?
I.e.
-fdump-tree-pre-start --> dump IR before TODO_start of PRE pass
-fdump-tree-pre-before --> dump IR just before PRE after its TODO start finishes
-fdump-tree
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 02:36, Richard Guenther
wrote:
>> For one thing, you need to either remember what is the previous pass,
>> or dump all passes which for large files can take very long time. Even
>> with all the dumps, you will need to eyeballing to find the previous
>> pass which may or may
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 2:36 AM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:20 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
>>>
>>> Your patch doesn't really improve this but adds to the confusion.
>>>
>>> + /* Override dump TODOs. */
>>> + if (dump_file && (pass->todo_flags_finish & TODO_dump_func)
>>
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:20 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
>>
>> Your patch doesn't really improve this but adds to the confusion.
>>
>> + /* Override dump TODOs. */
>> + if (dump_file && (pass->todo_flags_finish & TODO_dump_func)
>> + && (dump_flags & TDF_BEFORE))
>> + {
>> + pass->
>
> Your patch doesn't really improve this but adds to the confusion.
>
> + /* Override dump TODOs. */
> + if (dump_file && (pass->todo_flags_finish & TODO_dump_func)
> + && (dump_flags & TDF_BEFORE))
> + {
> + pass->todo_flags_finish &= ~TODO_dump_func;
> + pass->todo_flags_st
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 11:23 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 2:12 PM, Basile Starynkevitch
> wrote:
>> On Wed, 1 Jun 2011 13:26:24 -0700
>> Xinliang David Li wrote:
>>
>>> Hi, this is a simple patch that support dump_before flag. E.g,
>>>
>>> -fdump-tree-pre-before
>>>
>>>
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 2:12 PM, Basile Starynkevitch
wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Jun 2011 13:26:24 -0700
> Xinliang David Li wrote:
>
>> Hi, this is a simple patch that support dump_before flag. E.g,
>>
>> -fdump-tree-pre-before
>>
>> This is useful for diffing the the IR before and after a pass.
>
> Perh
On Wed, 1 Jun 2011 13:26:24 -0700
Xinliang David Li wrote:
> Hi, this is a simple patch that support dump_before flag. E.g,
>
> -fdump-tree-pre-before
>
> This is useful for diffing the the IR before and after a pass.
Perhaps you forgot to actually attach the patch?
> Gcc dumping needs more c
Sorry about it. Here it is.
David
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 1:36 PM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 10:26 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
>> Hi, this is a simple patch that support dump_before flag. E.g,
>>
>> -fdump-tree-pre-before
>>
>> This is useful for diffing the the IR befor
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 10:26 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> Hi, this is a simple patch that support dump_before flag. E.g,
>
> -fdump-tree-pre-before
>
> This is useful for diffing the the IR before and after a pass.
>
> Gcc dumping needs more cleanups -- such as allowing IR only dump,
> allowing
Hi, this is a simple patch that support dump_before flag. E.g,
-fdump-tree-pre-before
This is useful for diffing the the IR before and after a pass.
Gcc dumping needs more cleanups -- such as allowing IR only dump,
allowing IR dumping for a particular function etc. The exposure of
'dumpfile' (in
26 matches
Mail list logo
