------- Comment #7 from hjl at lucon dot org 2006-05-05 15:49 ------- (In reply to comment #6) > (In reply to comment #5) > > There are several problems with the current SEE implementation: > > > > 1. SEE uses NEXT_INSN/PREV_INSN to find adjacent insns to check if SEE > > is safe. But with -g, NEXT_INSN/PREV_INSN may point to a NOTE: > > > > That one is easy to fix. Please post a patch to using > next_nonnote_insn/prev_nonnote_insn instead. > > And then the -O3 (without -g) is a different issue. >
You are right. Using next_nonnote_insn/prev_nonnote_insn won't solve -O3 (without -g). One real problem is SEE can't determine if SEE is safe by just looking at next_nonnote_insn/prev_nonnote_insn. The relevant insn may be a few more insns away. Denis, do you have a patch to address this? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27437
