From: Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com>
To: linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Christopher Li <sparse@chrisli.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] avoid some struct symbol member for for-statements
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 22:49:17 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170628204918.25853-2-luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170628204918.25853-1-luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com>
The for-statement needs a lot of fields in struct statement, much
more than any other statement. This is due to the complexity of
the for-statement.
The possibility in C99 to declare variables in the initialization
part of the statement add yet another field to hold the declared
symbols. However, these symbols doesn't need a lis of their own,
they can simply be put in the list of a STMT_DECLARATION used
as the 'pre-' statement of a classic for-statement.
Merge the symbols list with the pre-statement.
Note: The motivation for this change is to make struct statement
smaller. The change also make further processing slightly
simpler since we don't have to process the declaration
separately.
Signed-off-by: Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com>
---
compile-i386.c | 1 -
dissect.c | 1 -
evaluate.c | 1 -
inline.c | 2 --
linearize.c | 6 ------
parse.c | 22 +++++++++++++++-------
parse.h | 1 -
show-parse.c | 1 -
8 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
diff --git a/compile-i386.c b/compile-i386.c
index 24e408baa..de252c8f9 100644
--- a/compile-i386.c
+++ b/compile-i386.c
@@ -1926,7 +1926,6 @@ static void emit_loop(struct statement *stmt)
loop_continue = new_label();
loopstk_push(loop_continue, loop_bottom);
- x86_symbol_decl(stmt->iterator_syms);
x86_statement(pre_statement);
if (!post_condition || post_condition->type != EXPR_VALUE || post_condition->value) {
loop_top = new_label();
diff --git a/dissect.c b/dissect.c
index 5f067eb4c..9f823980d 100644
--- a/dissect.c
+++ b/dissect.c
@@ -494,7 +494,6 @@ static struct symbol *do_statement(usage_t mode, struct statement *stmt)
}
break; case STMT_ITERATOR:
- do_sym_list(stmt->iterator_syms);
do_statement(U_VOID, stmt->iterator_pre_statement);
do_expression(U_R_VAL, stmt->iterator_pre_condition);
do_statement(U_VOID, stmt->iterator_post_statement);
diff --git a/evaluate.c b/evaluate.c
index cf3cf244d..e5b3b5904 100644
--- a/evaluate.c
+++ b/evaluate.c
@@ -3279,7 +3279,6 @@ static void evaluate_if_statement(struct statement *stmt)
static void evaluate_iterator(struct statement *stmt)
{
- evaluate_symbol_list(stmt->iterator_syms);
evaluate_conditional(stmt->iterator_pre_condition, 1);
evaluate_conditional(stmt->iterator_post_condition,1);
evaluate_statement(stmt->iterator_pre_statement);
diff --git a/inline.c b/inline.c
index a3002c6bd..dec07a25c 100644
--- a/inline.c
+++ b/inline.c
@@ -421,8 +421,6 @@ static struct statement *copy_one_statement(struct statement *stmt)
stmt = dup_statement(stmt);
stmt->iterator_break = copy_symbol(stmt->pos, stmt->iterator_break);
stmt->iterator_continue = copy_symbol(stmt->pos, stmt->iterator_continue);
- stmt->iterator_syms = copy_symbol_list(stmt->iterator_syms);
-
stmt->iterator_pre_statement = copy_one_statement(stmt->iterator_pre_statement);
stmt->iterator_pre_condition = copy_expression(stmt->iterator_pre_condition);
diff --git a/linearize.c b/linearize.c
index 7313e72d8..6d0695a18 100644
--- a/linearize.c
+++ b/linearize.c
@@ -2000,12 +2000,6 @@ static pseudo_t linearize_iterator(struct entrypoint *ep, struct statement *stmt
struct statement *post_statement = stmt->iterator_post_statement;
struct expression *post_condition = stmt->iterator_post_condition;
struct basic_block *loop_top, *loop_body, *loop_continue, *loop_end;
- struct symbol *sym;
-
- FOR_EACH_PTR(stmt->iterator_syms, sym) {
- linearize_one_symbol(ep, sym);
- } END_FOR_EACH_PTR(sym);
- concat_symbol_list(stmt->iterator_syms, &ep->syms);
linearize_statement(ep, pre_statement);
loop_body = loop_top = alloc_basic_block(ep, stmt->pos);
diff --git a/parse.c b/parse.c
index 214547904..e063dae99 100644
--- a/parse.c
+++ b/parse.c
@@ -2282,36 +2282,44 @@ static void validate_for_loop_decl(struct symbol *sym)
static struct token *parse_for_statement(struct token *token, struct statement *stmt)
{
- struct symbol_list *syms;
- struct expression *e1, *e2, *e3;
+ struct expression *e2, *e3;
struct statement *iterator;
+ struct statement *pre = NULL;
- start_iterator(stmt);
token = expect(token->next, '(', "after 'for'");
- syms = NULL;
- e1 = NULL;
/* C99 variable declaration? */
if (lookup_type(token)) {
+ struct symbol_list *syms = NULL;
+ struct position pos = token->pos;
+ start_symbol_scope();
token = external_declaration(token, &syms, validate_for_loop_decl);
+ pre = alloc_statement(pos, STMT_DECLARATION);
+ pre->declaration = syms;
} else {
+ struct expression *e1 = NULL;
token = parse_expression(token, &e1);
token = expect(token, ';', "in 'for'");
+ pre = make_statement(e1);
}
+
+ start_iterator(stmt);
token = parse_expression(token, &e2);
token = expect(token, ';', "in 'for'");
token = parse_expression(token, &e3);
token = expect(token, ')', "in 'for'");
token = statement(token, &iterator);
- stmt->iterator_syms = syms;
- stmt->iterator_pre_statement = make_statement(e1);
+ stmt->iterator_pre_statement = pre;
stmt->iterator_pre_condition = e2;
stmt->iterator_post_statement = make_statement(e3);
stmt->iterator_post_condition = NULL;
stmt->iterator_statement = iterator;
end_iterator(stmt);
+ if (pre && pre->type == STMT_DECLARATION)
+ end_symbol_scope();
+
return token;
}
diff --git a/parse.h b/parse.h
index 26227a387..e01497096 100644
--- a/parse.h
+++ b/parse.h
@@ -88,7 +88,6 @@ struct statement {
struct /* iterator_struct */ {
struct symbol *iterator_break;
struct symbol *iterator_continue;
- struct symbol_list *iterator_syms;
struct statement *iterator_pre_statement;
struct expression *iterator_pre_condition;
diff --git a/show-parse.c b/show-parse.c
index 5e3e13165..6801a68e2 100644
--- a/show-parse.c
+++ b/show-parse.c
@@ -633,7 +633,6 @@ int show_statement(struct statement *stmt)
struct expression *post_condition = stmt->iterator_post_condition;
int val, loop_top = 0, loop_bottom = 0;
- show_symbol_decl(stmt->iterator_syms);
show_statement(pre_statement);
if (pre_condition) {
if (pre_condition->type == EXPR_VALUE) {
--
2.13.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-06-28 20:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-06-28 20:49 [PATCH 0/2] simplify for-statement & make struct statement smaller Luc Van Oostenryck
2017-06-28 20:49 ` Luc Van Oostenryck [this message]
2017-06-28 20:49 ` [PATCH 2/2] make for-loop statement simpler Luc Van Oostenryck
2017-06-29 0:18 ` Christopher Li
2017-06-29 3:18 ` Luc Van Oostenryck
2017-07-01 14:03 ` Bernd Petrovitsch
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170628204918.25853-2-luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com \
--to=luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sparse@chrisli.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox