On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 8:52 PM, Andrew MacLeod <amacl...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 06/27/2013 02:39 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>
>>
>> in tree-ssanames.c:release_ssa_names() :
>>
>> if (! SSA_NAME_IN_FREE_LIST (var))
>> {
>> tree saved_ssa_name_var = SSA_NAME_VAR (var);
>> int saved_ssa_name_version = SSA_NAME_VERSION (var);
>> use_operand_p imm = &(SSA_NAME_IMM_USE_NODE (var));
>> <..>
>> /* Hopefully this can go away once we have the new incremental
>> SSA updating code installed. */
>> SET_SSA_NAME_VAR_OR_IDENTIFIER (var, saved_ssa_name_var);
>> I don't see a big issue with this, sure, you could
>> tree saved_ssa_name_identifier = saved_ssa_name_var ? saved_ssa_name_var :
>> SSA_NAME_IDENTIFIER (var);
>> and use that instead in SET_SSA_NAME_VAR_OR_IDENTIFIER.
>
>
> Yeah I wasn't too concerned about this one, the outof-ssa case looked like
> more of a possible issue. Maybe neither is, they just popped out as
> inconsistent uses.
Restoring SSA_NAME_VAR_OR_IDENTIFIER is only for debugging. Yes,
it probably should save SSA_NAME_VAR_OR_IDENTIFIER instead of SSA_NAME_VAR.
Richard.
> Andrew
>
