| Message ID | 20201227092759.30999-3-luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Mainlined, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | fix rem_usage() | expand |
On 27/12/2020 09:27, Luc Van Oostenryck wrote: > rem_usage() is used to remove an element from a def-use chain. Optionally, Hmm, rename this to 'remove_usage()' at the same time? ATB, Ramsay Jones > if the chain become empty, the defining instruction can also be killed. > > This optional part is currently be done on all pseudos but only those > having a definition should be concerned. > > Fix this by adding a check so that only PSEUDO_REGs and PSEUDO_PHIs are killed. > > Signed-off-by: Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com> > --- > simplify.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/simplify.c b/simplify.c > index a877b693b610..12482d787189 100644 > --- a/simplify.c > +++ b/simplify.c > @@ -271,7 +271,7 @@ static inline void rem_usage(pseudo_t p, pseudo_t *usep, int kill) > { > if (has_use_list(p)) { > delete_pseudo_user_list_entry(&p->users, usep, 1); > - if (kill && !p->users) > + if (kill && !p->users && has_definition(p)) > kill_instruction(p->def); > } > } >
On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 05:22:36PM +0000, Ramsay Jones wrote: > > > On 27/12/2020 09:27, Luc Van Oostenryck wrote: > > rem_usage() is used to remove an element from a def-use chain. Optionally, > > Hmm, rename this to 'remove_usage()' at the same time? It can't, 'remove_usage()' is already taken and 'rem_usage()' is more for internal uses than 'remove_usage()'. -- Luc
On 28/12/2020 21:39, Luc Van Oostenryck wrote: > On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 05:22:36PM +0000, Ramsay Jones wrote: >> >> >> On 27/12/2020 09:27, Luc Van Oostenryck wrote: >>> rem_usage() is used to remove an element from a def-use chain. Optionally, >> >> Hmm, rename this to 'remove_usage()' at the same time? > > It can't, 'remove_usage()' is already taken and 'rem_usage()' is more > for internal uses than 'remove_usage()'. Ugh! I just took a quick look. Ugly. ;-) Well, I think I would rename it 'remove_use()' or somesuch instead. ATB, Ramsay Jones
On 28/12/2020 22:09, Ramsay Jones wrote: > > > On 28/12/2020 21:39, Luc Van Oostenryck wrote: >> On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 05:22:36PM +0000, Ramsay Jones wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 27/12/2020 09:27, Luc Van Oostenryck wrote: >>>> rem_usage() is used to remove an element from a def-use chain. Optionally, >>> >>> Hmm, rename this to 'remove_usage()' at the same time? >> >> It can't, 'remove_usage()' is already taken and 'rem_usage()' is more >> for internal uses than 'remove_usage()'. > > Ugh! I just took a quick look. Ugly. ;-) > > Well, I think I would rename it 'remove_use()' or somesuch instead. Ahem, except you can't, because it is already used ... (facepalm). Ho Hum. ;-) ATB, Ramsay Jones
diff --git a/simplify.c b/simplify.c index a877b693b610..12482d787189 100644 --- a/simplify.c +++ b/simplify.c @@ -271,7 +271,7 @@ static inline void rem_usage(pseudo_t p, pseudo_t *usep, int kill) { if (has_use_list(p)) { delete_pseudo_user_list_entry(&p->users, usep, 1); - if (kill && !p->users) + if (kill && !p->users && has_definition(p)) kill_instruction(p->def); } }
rem_usage() is used to remove an element from a def-use chain. Optionally, if the chain become empty, the defining instruction can also be killed. This optional part is currently be done on all pseudos but only those having a definition should be concerned. Fix this by adding a check so that only PSEUDO_REGs and PSEUDO_PHIs are killed. Signed-off-by: Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com> --- simplify.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)