On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 7:37 AM, Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de> wrote:
>
> I'm trying to make IL verifying more streamlined - it's often
> that passes have some random (or no) verification in their TODO
> which makes pinning down issues to specific passes hard.
>
> Thus I propose to unify the various TODO_verify_* flags into
> a single one, TODO_verify_il, and based on what IL properties
> are currently active perform checking. That still leaves the
> possibility to have no checking (with no TODO_verify_il).
Agreed.
> Do people think that the fine-grained verification control
> is actually useful or do you agree with me that it leads to
> sloppiness?
It leads to sloppiness. We should not allow fine grained checking.
At most, we could throttle IL checking automatically depending on the
chosen --enable-checking value at config time. For
--enable-checking=release we could leave only the quickest and more
fundamental checks.
>
> Verification would be as outlined in the patch below - I didn't
> yet adjust users of the then obsoleted TODO flags (another
> possibility were to unconditionally verify - in the old days
> all verification was controlled by --enable-checking options).
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Thanks,
> Richard.
>
> Index: gcc/passes.c
> ===================================================================
> *** gcc/passes.c (revision 196201)
> --- gcc/passes.c (working copy)
> *************** execute_function_todo (void *data)
> *** 1957,1976 ****
> return;
>
> #if defined ENABLE_CHECKING
> ! if (flags & TODO_verify_ssa
> ! || (current_loops && loops_state_satisfies_p (LOOP_CLOSED_SSA)))
> {
> ! verify_gimple_in_cfg (cfun);
> ! verify_ssa (true);
> }
> - else if (flags & TODO_verify_stmts)
> - verify_gimple_in_cfg (cfun);
> - if (flags & TODO_verify_flow)
> - verify_flow_info ();
> - if (current_loops && loops_state_satisfies_p (LOOP_CLOSED_SSA))
> - verify_loop_closed_ssa (false);
> - if (flags & TODO_verify_rtl_sharing)
> - verify_rtl_sharing ();
> #endif
>
> cfun->last_verified = flags & TODO_verify_all;
> --- 1955,1982 ----
> return;
>
> #if defined ENABLE_CHECKING
> ! if (flags & TODO_verify_il)
> {
> ! if (cfun->curr_properties & PROP_cfg)
> ! verify_flow_info ();
> ! if (cfun->curr_properties & PROP_loops)
> ! verify_loop_structure ();
> ! if (cfun->curr_properties & PROP_gimple_any)
> ! {
> ! if (cfun->curr_properties & PROP_cfg)
> ! verify_gimple_in_cfg (cfun);
> ! else
> ! verify_gimple_in_seq (gimple_body (cfun->decl));
> ! }
> ! if (cfun->curr_properties & PROP_ssa)
> ! {
> ! verify_ssa ();
> ! if (current_loops && loops_state_satisfies_p (LOOP_CLOSED_SSA))
> ! verify_loop_closed_ssa (false);
> ! }
> ! if (cfun->curr_properties & PROP_rtl)
> ! verify_rtl_sharing ();
I agree with Micha. Do the checks bottom up? IL -> CFG -> SSA -> LOOP.
Diego.
