Hi!
First time I'm using this API -- so the error certainly may be on my
side. ;-)
What I'm doing, is a 'walk_gimple_seq', and in that one's
'callback_stmt', call 'walk_stmt_load_store_addr_ops', to collect
variable load/store/address-taken instances. This did seem quite
straight-forward, given the description; 'gcc/gimple-walk.c':
/* For the statement STMT call the callbacks VISIT_LOAD, VISIT_STORE and
VISIT_ADDR if non-NULL on loads, store and address-taken operands
passing the STMT, the base of the operand, the operand itself containing
the base and DATA to it. The base will be either a decl, an indirect
reference (including TARGET_MEM_REF) or the argument of an address
expression.
Returns the results of these callbacks or'ed. */
bool
walk_stmt_load_store_addr_ops (gimple *stmt, void *data,
walk_stmt_load_store_addr_fn visit_load,
walk_stmt_load_store_addr_fn visit_store,
walk_stmt_load_store_addr_fn visit_addr)
{ [...] }
Indeed, given (Fortran) 'zzz = 1', we produce GIMPLE:
gimple_assign <real_cst, zzz, 1.0e+0, NULL, NULL>
..., and calling 'walk_stmt_load_store_addr_ops' on that, I see, as
expected, the 'visit_store' callback invoked, with 'rhs' and 'arg':
'<var_decl zzz>'.
However, given (Fortran) 'zzz = r + r2', we produce GIMPLE:
gimple_assign <plus_expr, zzz, r, r2, NULL>
..., and calling 'walk_stmt_load_store_addr_ops' on that, I see,
unexpectedly, no callback at all invoked: neither 'visit_load', nor
'visit_store' (nor 'visit_address', obviously).
>From a quick look at 'gcc/gimple-walk.c:walk_stmt_load_store_addr_ops',
this seems to intentionally be implemented in this way -- but I don't
understand the rationale?
Instead of 'walk_gimple_seq' -> 'callback_stmt' ->
'walk_stmt_load_store_addr_ops', do I need to use 'walk_gimple_seq' ->
'callback_op' -> "something"?
Grüße
Thomas
-----------------
Mentor Graphics (Deutschland) GmbH, Arnulfstrasse 201, 80634 München
Registergericht München HRB 106955, Geschäftsführer: Thomas Heurung, Frank
Thürauf
