On 30 October 2012 05:20, Teresa Johnson <tejohn...@google.com> wrote: > Index: cfgrtl.c > =================================================================== > --- cfgrtl.c (revision 192692) > +++ cfgrtl.c (working copy) > @@ -912,7 +912,8 @@ rtl_can_merge_blocks (basic_block a, basic_block b > partition boundaries). See the comments at the top of > bb-reorder.c:partition_hot_cold_basic_blocks for complete details. */ > > - if (BB_PARTITION (a) != BB_PARTITION (b)) > + if (find_reg_note (BB_END (a), REG_CROSSING_JUMP, NULL_RTX) > + || BB_PARTITION (a) != BB_PARTITION (b)) > return false; > > /* Protect the loop latches. */ > @@ -3978,7 +3979,8 @@ cfg_layout_can_merge_blocks_p (basic_block a, basi > partition boundaries). See the comments at the top of > bb-reorder.c:partition_hot_cold_basic_blocks for complete details. */ > > - if (BB_PARTITION (a) != BB_PARTITION (b)) > + if (find_reg_note (BB_END (a), REG_CROSSING_JUMP, NULL_RTX) > + || BB_PARTITION (a) != BB_PARTITION (b)) > return false; > > /* Protect the loop latches. */
As this if() condition seems to be the canonical way to detect being in a different partition should it be moved out into a query function, and all of cfgrtl.c updated to use it? [Note I am not a maintainer and so can't approve/reject your patch]. Thanks, Matt -- Matthew Gretton-Dann Linaro Toolchain Working Group matthew.gretton-d...@linaro.org
