On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 8:20 PM Andrew Pinski <[email protected]> wrote: > > While debugging PR 122273, I noticed that print_node was not > printing out the clique/base for MEM_REF/TARGET_MEM_REF. This > made harder to understand why operand_equal_p (without looking > into the code) would be rejecting two looking the same MEM_REFs.
Most of the time it will be 0/0, can you do like in pretty-print and only print this when MR_DEPENDENCE_CLIQUE != 0? Ok with that change. Richard. > Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux-gnu. > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > * print-tree.cc (print_node): Print out clique/base > for MEM_REF and TARGET_MEM_REF. > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Pinski <[email protected]> > --- > gcc/print-tree.cc | 7 +++++++ > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/gcc/print-tree.cc b/gcc/print-tree.cc > index f84be762741..fd775b8cb98 100644 > --- a/gcc/print-tree.cc > +++ b/gcc/print-tree.cc > @@ -747,6 +747,13 @@ print_node (FILE *file, const char *prefix, tree node, > int indent, > case tcc_reference: > case tcc_statement: > case tcc_vl_exp: > + if (code == MEM_REF || code == TARGET_MEM_REF) > + { > + indent_to (file, indent + 4); > + fprintf (file, "clique: %d base: %d", > + MR_DEPENDENCE_CLIQUE (node), > + MR_DEPENDENCE_BASE (node)); > + } > if (code == BIND_EXPR) > { > print_node (file, "vars", TREE_OPERAND (node, 0), indent + 4); > -- > 2.43.0 >
