Rietveld Code Review Tool
Help | Bug tracker | Discussion group | Source code | Sign in
(258)

Issue 4568043: [lto] Merge streamer hooks from pph branch. (Closed)

Can't Edit
Can't Publish+Mail
Start Review
Created:
13 years, 1 month ago by Diego Novillo
Modified:
12 years, 10 months ago
Reviewers:
CC:
rguenther_suse.de, jh_suse.cz, gcc-patches_gcc.gnu.org
Visibility:
Public.

Patch Set 1 #

Patch Set 2 : Revised streamer hooks merge #

Unified diffs Side-by-side diffs Delta from patch set Stats (+276 lines, -85 lines) Patch
M gcc/Makefile.in View 1 2 chunks +4 lines, -3 lines 0 comments Download
M gcc/cgraphunit.c View 1 2 chunks +5 lines, -0 lines 0 comments Download
M gcc/lto-streamer.h View 1 4 chunks +92 lines, -28 lines 0 comments Download
M gcc/lto-streamer.c View 1 3 chunks +53 lines, -1 line 0 comments Download
M gcc/lto-streamer-in.c View 1 6 chunks +34 lines, -14 lines 0 comments Download
M gcc/lto-streamer-out.c View 1 8 chunks +71 lines, -36 lines 0 comments Download
M gcc/lto/lto.c View 1 2 chunks +17 lines, -3 lines 0 comments Download

Messages

Total messages: 7
Diego Novillo
This patch merges the LTO streamer hooks from the pph branch. These hooks are meant ...
13 years, 1 month ago (2011-06-01 00:12:35 UTC) #1
rguenther_suse.de
On Tue, 31 May 2011, Diego Novillo wrote: > > This patch merges the LTO ...
13 years, 1 month ago (2011-06-01 12:07:45 UTC) #2
Diego Novillo
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 08:07, Richard Guenther <rguenther@suse.de> wrote: >> static void cgraph_expand_all_functions ...
13 years, 1 month ago (2011-06-01 16:03:04 UTC) #3
rguenther_suse.de
On Wed, 1 Jun 2011, Diego Novillo wrote: > On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at ...
13 years, 1 month ago (2011-06-01 19:19:32 UTC) #4
Diego Novillo
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 15:19, Richard Guenther <rguenther@suse.de> wrote: > Yes, I see ...
13 years, 1 month ago (2011-06-04 19:30:34 UTC) #5
rguenther_suse.de
On Sat, 4 Jun 2011, Diego Novillo wrote: > On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at ...
13 years ago (2011-06-06 14:51:00 UTC) #6
Diego Novillo
13 years ago (2011-06-06 15:33:08 UTC) #7
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 10:50, Richard Guenther <rguenther@suse.de> wrote:

> Do you remember if it was only void_zero_node that causes problems?
> We could just special-case it in
> lto_input_integer_cst/lto_output_integer_cst.  Or even fix the C family
> frontends to not create or use this strange node.  It seems to be
> a special tree for "empty valid something" which could as well be
> a new tree code with a singleton object.

void_zero_node was the only one causing problems because it couldn't
be built with build_int_cst_wide.  However, the other well-known
constants where causing problem when the parser tried to
pointer-compare them.  This sounded a bit strange to me, since I was
expecting the constant cache in the type to give back shared
constants, but I did not investigate it further.

Making void_zero_node a new singleton object sounds like a good cleanup.


Diego.
Sign in to reply to this message.

Powered by Google App Engine
RSS Feeds Recent Issues | This issue
This is Rietveld f62528b