Re: [PATCH] Remove dead code and function

2021-11-25 Thread Jan Hubicka via Gcc-patches
> The only use of get_alias_symbol is gated by a gcc_unreachable (), > so the following patch gets rid of it. > > Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, OK? OK, thanks! Honza

Re: [PATCH] Remove dead code.

2021-11-12 Thread Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
On November 12, 2021 8:18:59 PM GMT+01:00, "H.J. Lu" wrote: >On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 11:15 AM Richard Biener > wrote: >> >> On November 12, 2021 3:41:41 PM GMT+01:00, "H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches" >> wrote: >> >On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 6:27 AM Martin Liška wrote: >> >> >> >> On 11/8/21 15:19, Jeff

Re: [PATCH] Remove dead code.

2021-11-12 Thread H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches
On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 11:15 AM Richard Biener wrote: > > On November 12, 2021 3:41:41 PM GMT+01:00, "H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches" > wrote: > >On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 6:27 AM Martin Liška wrote: > >> > >> On 11/8/21 15:19, Jeff Law wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> > On 11/8/2021 2:59 AM, Jakub Jelinek vi

Re: [PATCH] Remove dead code.

2021-11-12 Thread Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
On November 12, 2021 3:41:41 PM GMT+01:00, "H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches" wrote: >On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 6:27 AM Martin Liška wrote: >> >> On 11/8/21 15:19, Jeff Law wrote: >> > >> > >> > On 11/8/2021 2:59 AM, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote: >> >> On Mon, Nov 08, 2021 at 09:45:39AM +0100, Marti

Re: [PATCH] Remove dead code.

2021-11-12 Thread H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches
On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 6:44 AM Martin Liška wrote: > > On 11/12/21 15:41, H.J. Lu wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 6:27 AM Martin Liška wrote: > >> > >> On 11/8/21 15:19, Jeff Law wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> On 11/8/2021 2:59 AM, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote: > On Mon, Nov 08, 2021 at

Re: [PATCH] Remove dead code.

2021-11-12 Thread Martin Liška
On 11/12/21 15:41, H.J. Lu wrote: On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 6:27 AM Martin Liška wrote: On 11/8/21 15:19, Jeff Law wrote: On 11/8/2021 2:59 AM, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote: On Mon, Nov 08, 2021 at 09:45:39AM +0100, Martin Liška wrote: This fixes issue reported in the PR. Ready to b

Re: [PATCH] Remove dead code.

2021-11-12 Thread H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches
On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 6:27 AM Martin Liška wrote: > > On 11/8/21 15:19, Jeff Law wrote: > > > > > > On 11/8/2021 2:59 AM, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote: > >> On Mon, Nov 08, 2021 at 09:45:39AM +0100, Martin Liška wrote: > >>> This fixes issue reported in the PR. > >>> > >>> Ready to be ins

Re: [PATCH] Remove dead code.

2021-11-12 Thread Martin Liška
On 11/8/21 15:19, Jeff Law wrote: On 11/8/2021 2:59 AM, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote: On Mon, Nov 08, 2021 at 09:45:39AM +0100, Martin Liška wrote: This fixes issue reported in the PR. Ready to be installed? I'm not sure.  liboffloadmic is copied from upstream, so the right thing if

Re: [PATCH] Remove dead code.

2021-11-08 Thread Jeff Law via Gcc-patches
On 11/8/2021 2:59 AM, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote: On Mon, Nov 08, 2021 at 09:45:39AM +0100, Martin Liška wrote: This fixes issue reported in the PR. Ready to be installed? I'm not sure. liboffloadmic is copied from upstream, so the right thing if we want to do anything at all (if

Re: [PATCH] Remove dead code.

2021-11-08 Thread Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
On Mon, Nov 08, 2021 at 09:45:39AM +0100, Martin Liška wrote: > This fixes issue reported in the PR. > > Ready to be installed? I'm not sure. liboffloadmic is copied from upstream, so the right thing if we want to do anything at all (if we don't remove it, nothing bad happens, the condition is n

Re: [PATCH] Remove dead code in df-scan.c (PR tree-optimization/90978).

2019-06-25 Thread Richard Sandiford
Martin Liška writes: > Hi. > > The patch is about removal of an unreachable code. That has been proved > by an accidental gcc_unreachable places 9 year ago. Heh. > Patch can bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu and survives regression tests. > > Ready to be installed? Yes, thanks. Richard > Thanks,

Re: [PATCH] Remove dead code (PR ipa/90874).

2019-06-17 Thread Jan Hubicka
> Hi. > > After r272037 change we have a leftover dead code in odr_type_p. > > Ready to be installed? OK (it is obvious anyway:), thanks! Honza > Thanks, > Martin > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > 2019-06-17 Martin Liska > > PR ipa/90874 > * ipa-utils.h (odr_type_p): Remove dead code. > --

Re: [PATCH] Remove dead code in asan.c

2017-06-30 Thread Jakub Jelinek
> + /* Unpoison shadow memory that corresponds to a variable that was > + is subject of use-after-return sanitization. */ was is ? And shouldn't it be subject to instead of subject of? Otherwise LGTM. Jakub

Re: [PATCH] Remove dead code in asan.c

2017-06-30 Thread Martin Liška
On 06/30/2017 12:15 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 12:00:36PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote: >> Hi. >> >> Following crap code was added by me when I added use-after-scope. >> Actually decl always points to LASANPC, so asan_handled_variables->contains >> (decl) >> is always false. >

Re: [PATCH] Remove dead code in asan.c

2017-06-30 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 12:00:36PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote: > Hi. > > Following crap code was added by me when I added use-after-scope. > Actually decl always points to LASANPC, so asan_handled_variables->contains > (decl) > is always false. > > Well, originally the idea was to not clear conte

Re: [PATCH] Remove dead code from c_common_get_alias_set

2017-04-25 Thread Richard Biener
On Mon, 24 Apr 2017, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > On 04/24/17 09:00, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Fri, 21 Apr 2017, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > > > >> Hi! > >> > >> > >> This removes some dead and unreachable code in c_common_get_alias_set: > >> Because cc1 was recently changed to be only called with one f

Re: [PATCH] Remove dead code from c_common_get_alias_set

2017-04-24 Thread Bernd Edlinger
On 04/24/17 09:00, Richard Biener wrote: > On Fri, 21 Apr 2017, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > >> Hi! >> >> >> This removes some dead and unreachable code in c_common_get_alias_set: >> Because cc1 was recently changed to be only called with one file at a >> time, the code after "if (num_in_fnames == 1) re

Re: [PATCH] Remove dead code from c_common_get_alias_set

2017-04-24 Thread Richard Biener
On Fri, 21 Apr 2017, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > Hi! > > > This removes some dead and unreachable code in c_common_get_alias_set: > Because cc1 was recently changed to be only called with one file at a > time, the code after "if (num_in_fnames == 1) return -1;" is no longer > reachable, and can thus

Re: [PATCH] Remove dead code in omp-low.c

2016-04-13 Thread Thomas Schwinge
Hi! Ping Andi's patch; I just found the same thing: On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 11:34:18 -0800, Andi Kleen wrote: > Since the accelerator changes omp_expand_local is not used anymore. Specifically, and thereabouts. As

Re: [PATCH] remove dead code used by the old cloog scheduler

2015-10-06 Thread Tobias Grosser
On 10/06/2015 05:45 PM, Sebastian Pop wrote: 2015-10-05 Aditya Kumar Sebastian Pop * graphite-dependences.c (scop_get_transformed_schedule): Remove. (no_violations): Remove. (subtract_commutative_associative_deps): Remove.

Re: [PATCH] remove dead code of commutative_reductions

2015-09-29 Thread Sebastian Pop
Tobias Grosser wrote: > On 09/29/2015 06:26 PM, Sebastian Pop wrote: > >This code is not used anymore after we removed the previous loop optimizer > >(not > >based on the ISL scheduler.) We will add back the detection of commutative > >reductions after we improve the code generation of scalar dep

Re: [PATCH] remove dead code of commutative_reductions

2015-09-29 Thread Tobias Grosser
On 09/29/2015 06:26 PM, Sebastian Pop wrote: This code is not used anymore after we removed the previous loop optimizer (not based on the ISL scheduler.) We will add back the detection of commutative reductions after we improve the code generation of scalar dependences (by not going out of SSA f

RE: [PATCH] Remove dead code from graphite-optimize-isl.c

2015-09-11 Thread Sebastian Paul Pop
For the record, the patch LGTM. Aditya and I have discussed about this in the morning. Thanks, Sebastian -Original Message- From: Aditya Kumar [mailto:aditya...@samsung.com] Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 12:30 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: tob...@grosser.es; richard.guent...@gmai

Re: [PATCH] Remove dead code from graphite-optimize-isl.c

2015-09-11 Thread Tobias Grosser
On 09/11/2015 07:29 PM, Aditya Kumar wrote: The variable `static bool enable_polly_vector' is always assigned to false. This results in dead code in optimize-isl.c. Removing the dead code. No functional change intended. Fine with me as well. This code is used in Polly to enable outer loop vec

Re: [PATCH] Remove dead code.

2015-05-04 Thread Jeff Law
On 05/04/2015 05:50 AM, Dominik Vogt wrote: This patch removes a "write only" variable from the C++ code. ChangeLog: -- 2015-05-04 Dominik Vogt * call.c (print_z_candidates): Remove dead code. OK. Please install. FWIW, removing a write-only variable seems like it ought ot fall u

Re: [PATCH] Remove dead code in input_gimple_stmt

2013-11-13 Thread Richard Biener
On Mon, 11 Nov 2013, Richard Biener wrote: > > The following patch removes now dead code from input_gimple_stmt > (which also could be quite slow). Type mismatches can only > occur at the decl level after the new tree merging code went > in and those are handed by wrapping all decls in MEM_REFs

Re: [PATCH] Remove dead code from fold_stmt_1

2012-12-06 Thread Richard Biener
On Tue, 27 Nov 2012, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 01:00:05PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > > > > This removes dead code as suggested by Jakub. > > > > Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. > > Looks as partial removal only. IMHO > gimple_stmt_iterator gsinex

Re: [PATCH] Remove dead code from fold_stmt_1

2012-11-27 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 01:00:05PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > > This removes dead code as suggested by Jakub. > > Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Looks as partial removal only. IMHO gimple_stmt_iterator gsinext = *gsi; gimple next_stmt; gsi_next (&gsinext); nex