On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 3:14 AM, Michael Matz <m...@suse.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
>> > In the meanwhile, is the below version okay?
>>
>> If it bootstraps & tests ok then yes. The java parts look obvious.
>
> So, we indeed can't remove the other calls to
> canonicalize_constructor_val, because of local ctors. And fortran has a
> similar problem with java. Instead of fixing up all these places of
> resetting cfun (where otherwise the frontends don't deal at all with it,
> it's mostly just set from the various cgraph routines), I decided to
> simply clear this at the appropriate place in
> cgraph_finalize_compilation_unit.
>
> Regstrapping in progress again. Still okay if that works?
>
>
> Ciao,
> Michael.
> --
> * cgraphbuild.c (record_reference): Canonicalize constructor
> values.
>
> Index: cgraphbuild.c
> ===================================================================
> --- cgraphbuild.c.orig 2011-04-03 11:28:45.000000000 +0200
> +++ cgraphbuild.c 2011-04-03 11:31:21.000000000 +0200
> @@ -53,6 +53,12 @@ record_reference (tree *tp, int *walk_su
> tree decl;
> struct record_reference_ctx *ctx = (struct record_reference_ctx *)data;
>
> + t = canonicalize_constructor_val (t);
> + if (!t)
> + t = *tp;
> + else if (t != *tp)
> + *tp = t;
> +
> switch (TREE_CODE (t))
> {
> case VAR_DECL:
This change caused:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48440
--
H.J.
