Re: [PATCH 04/10] tree-object-size: Single pass dependency loop resolution

2021-11-23 Thread Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 07:14:04PM +0530, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote: > > This feels way too risky to me. I think making some code do something > > different between (x & OST_DYNAMIC) == 0 and == 1 is just fine, > > it doesn't have to share everything. After all, for __bdos we actually > > emit

Re: [PATCH 04/10] tree-object-size: Single pass dependency loop resolution

2021-11-23 Thread Siddhesh Poyarekar
On 11/23/21 17:37, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 12:31:30AM +0530, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote: Use SSA names as placeholders self-referencing variables to generate expressions for object sizes and then reduce those size expressions to constants instead of repeatedly walking through

Re: [PATCH 04/10] tree-object-size: Single pass dependency loop resolution

2021-11-23 Thread Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 12:31:30AM +0530, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote: > Use SSA names as placeholders self-referencing variables to generate > expressions for object sizes and then reduce those size expressions > to constants instead of repeatedly walking through statements. > > This change also