On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 4:48 PM, Thomas Schwinge <tho...@codesourcery.com> wrote: > Hi Richard! > > On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 13:25:01 +0200, Richard Biener > <richard.guent...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 1:19 PM, Thomas Schwinge >> <tho...@codesourcery.com> wrote: >> > On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 10:18:35 +0200, Richard Biener >> > <richard.guent...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Thomas Schwinge >> >> <tho...@codesourcery.com> wrote: >> >> > --- gcc/tree-streamer.c >> >> > +++ gcc/tree-streamer.c >> >> > @@ -278,9 +278,23 @@ record_common_node (struct streamer_tree_cache_d >> >> > *cache, tree node) >> >> > streamer_tree_cache_append (cache, node, cache->nodes.length ()); >> >> > >> >> > if (POINTER_TYPE_P (node) >> >> > - || TREE_CODE (node) == COMPLEX_TYPE >> >> > || TREE_CODE (node) == ARRAY_TYPE) >> >> > record_common_node (cache, TREE_TYPE (node)); >> >> > + else if (TREE_CODE (node) == COMPLEX_TYPE) >> >> > [...] >> >> > else if (TREE_CODE (node) == RECORD_TYPE) > >> [looks to me we miss handling of vector type components alltogether, >> maybe there are no global vector type trees ...] > > Looks like it, yes. Would a patch like the following be reasonable, > which explicitly lists/handles all expected tree codes, or is something > like that not feasible? (That's a subset of tree codes I gathered by a > partial run of the GCC testsuite, and libgomp testsuite; not claiming > this is complete.)
I think it would be a nice thing to have indeed. So -- I'm inclined to approve this patch ;) Thanks, Richard. > commit f28dd9618be8a26c6a75ee089f1755e4e0281106 > Author: Thomas Schwinge <tho...@codesourcery.com> > Date: Thu Sep 29 16:35:19 2016 +0200 > > Explicitly list all tree codes in gcc/tree-streamer.c:record_common_node > --- > gcc/tree-streamer.c | 32 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------- > 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git gcc/tree-streamer.c gcc/tree-streamer.c > index 6ada89a..8567a81 100644 > --- gcc/tree-streamer.c > +++ gcc/tree-streamer.c > @@ -303,17 +303,32 @@ record_common_node (struct streamer_tree_cache_d > *cache, tree node) > in the cache as hash value. */ > streamer_tree_cache_append (cache, node, cache->nodes.length ()); > > - if (POINTER_TYPE_P (node) > - || TREE_CODE (node) == ARRAY_TYPE) > - record_common_node (cache, TREE_TYPE (node)); > - else if (TREE_CODE (node) == COMPLEX_TYPE) > + switch (TREE_CODE (node)) > { > + case ERROR_MARK: > + case FIELD_DECL: > + case FIXED_POINT_TYPE: > + case IDENTIFIER_NODE: > + case INTEGER_CST: > + case INTEGER_TYPE: > + case POINTER_BOUNDS_TYPE: > + case REAL_TYPE: > + case TREE_LIST: > + case VOID_CST: > + case VOID_TYPE: > + /* No recursion. */ > + break; > + case POINTER_TYPE: > + case REFERENCE_TYPE: > + case ARRAY_TYPE: > + record_common_node (cache, TREE_TYPE (node)); > + break; > + case COMPLEX_TYPE: > /* Verify that a complex type's component type (node_type) has been > handled already (and we thus don't need to recurse here). */ > verify_common_node_recorded (cache, TREE_TYPE (node)); > - } > - else if (TREE_CODE (node) == RECORD_TYPE) > - { > + break; > + case RECORD_TYPE: > /* The FIELD_DECLs of structures should be shared, so that every > COMPONENT_REF uses the same tree node when referencing a field. > Pointer equality between FIELD_DECLs is used by the alias > @@ -322,6 +337,9 @@ record_common_node (struct streamer_tree_cache_d *cache, > tree node) > nonoverlapping_component_refs_of_decl_p). */ > for (tree f = TYPE_FIELDS (node); f; f = TREE_CHAIN (f)) > record_common_node (cache, f); > + break; > + default: > + gcc_unreachable (); > } > } > > > > Grüße > Thomas