Hi Steven, > From: Steven Bosscher [mailto:stevenb....@gmail.com] > Sent: Friday, March 20, 2015 3:54 PM > > > What I meant, is that I believe the tests are already done in > hash_scan_set and should be redundant in cprop_insn (i.e. the test can > be replaced with gcc_[checking_]assert).
Ok. > > I've attached a patch with some changes to it: introduce cprop_reg_p() > to get rid of all the "REG_P && regno > FIRST_PSEUDO_REGISTER" tests. > I still have the cprop_constant_p and cprop_reg_p tests in cprop_insn > but this weekend I'll try with gcc_checking_asserts instead. Please > have a look at the patch and let me know if you like it (given it's > mostly yours I hope you do like it ;-) I think it would be preferable to introduce PSEUDO_REG_P in rtl.h as this seems like a common pattern enough [1]. It would be nice to have a HARD_REG_P that would be cover the other common patterns REG_P && < FIRST_PSEUDO_REGISTER and REG_P && HARD_REGISTER_P but I can't come up with a good name (HARD_REGISTER_P is confusing because it doesn't check if it's a register in the first place). I noticed in do_local_cprop you replace >= FIRST_PSEUDO_REGISTER by cprop_reg_p without removing the REG_P as well. In implicit_set_cond_p there is a replacement of !REG_P || HARD_REGISTER_P by cprop_reg_p. It seems to me it should rather be replaced by !cprop_reg_p. Otherwise it looks ok. [1] grep -R "REG_P .*&&.*>= FIRST_PSEUDO_REGISTER" . | wc -l returns 23 > > Bootstrapped & tested on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu. In building all > of cc1, 35 extra copies are propagated with the patch. I'll try to launch a build and testsuite run with these 2 issues fixed before I leave tonight and will report the result on Monday. Best regards, Thomas
