------- Comment #3 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-22 12:47 ------- Subject: Re: remove_phi_node attempts removal of a phi node resized by resize_phi_node
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > ------- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-22 06:17 > ------- > We should never had needed resize_phi_node inside PRE and resize_phi_node also > does an exact replacement so that means you are keeping a reference to the old > PHI node when adding an edge which is wrong. > > PRE never directly calls resize_phi_node The insert_on_edge call PRE makes should *never* cause the number of predecessors to change, so i can't see why resize_phi_node would ever be called. Without an example case where it does, i can't debug this further. However, it's not "wrong" to keep a reference to a phi node when a random edge in the program changes. The API that doesn't allow such a thing is just broken. This is a symptom of the fact that our phi node arguments are stored in "pretend" vectors, even though it would be saner to use an embedded vec in that structure. This would allow reallocating arguments without having to change the entire phi node structure. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28798
