On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 9:11 PM, Aldy Hernandez <al...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 02/28/12 13:12, Richard Henderson wrote: >> >> On 02/28/12 09:44, Aldy Hernandez wrote: >>> >>> PR middle-end/51752 >>> * gimple.h (gimple_in_transaction): New. >>> (gimple_set_in_transaction): New. >>> (struct gimple_statement_base): Add in_transaction field. >>> * tree-ssa-loop-im.c: (movement_possibility): Restrict movement of >>> transaction loads. >>> (tree_ssa_lim_initialize): Compute transaction bits. >>> * tree.h (compute_transaction_bits): Protoize. >>> * trans-mem.c (tm_region_init): Use the heap to store BB >>> auxilliary data. >>> (compute_transaction_bits): New. >> >> >> Looks good. Thanks for your patience. >> >> >> r~ > > > Thank you. I have committed the patch. > > I will also look into the tree_could_trap business (and PRE and other > passes) to see if we can divine some context. But I probably won't get to > it before early next week.
The tree_could_trap business is definitely harder because you lack a stmt context - this helper takes a 'tree' argument. And it's not enough to adjust gimple_could_trap as both are used regularly... So fixing up individual passes is easier - I can only think of PRE being problematic right now, I am not aware that any other pass moves loads or stores. So I'd simply pre-compute the stmt bit in PRE and adjust the if (gimple_has_volatile_ops (stmt) || stmt_could_throw_p (stmt)) continue; in compute_avail accordingly. Richard. > Thanks.