On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 12:51 AM, Richard Kenner
ken...@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu wrote:
I found a weird piece of code that was added by kenner in a really early
revision. It checks for VAR_DECLs with frame or stack pointers as
DECL_RTL, and the comment in front of it mentions strength reduction.
I don't see how a VAR_DECL can ever get a DECL_RTL equal to one of
the mentioned regs.
Doesn't that happen when you have a local variable that's a
variable-sized object? What would have changed that would cause it to
no longer happen? This is tree-level stuff, not RTL.
The patch is ok if a
On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 06:17:52AM -0500, Richard Kenner wrote:
I don't see how a VAR_DECL can ever get a DECL_RTL equal to one of
the mentioned regs.
Doesn't that happen when you have a local variable that's a
variable-sized object? What would have changed that would cause it to
no
VLA VAR_DECLs have just DECL_HAS_VALUE_EXPR_P set and DECL_VALUE_EXPR being
INDIRECT_REF (or MEM_REF now?) dereferencing some DECL_ARTIFICIAL VAR_DECL
that is initialized from alloca builtin.So the VLA VAR_DECLs don't have
any DECL_RTL at all (kept for debug info purposes only), and the
I found a weird piece of code that was added by kenner in a really early
revision. It checks for VAR_DECLs with frame or stack pointers as
DECL_RTL, and the comment in front of it mentions strength reduction.
Presumably this was for the old loop optimizer? I can't think of
anything that would
I found a weird piece of code that was added by kenner in a really early
revision. It checks for VAR_DECLs with frame or stack pointers as
DECL_RTL, and the comment in front of it mentions strength reduction.
Presumably this was for the old loop optimizer? I can't think of
anything that would
