From patchwork Thu May 9 19:59:42 2019 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Bill Schmidt X-Patchwork-Id: 1097658 Return-Path: X-Original-To: incoming@patchwork.ozlabs.org Delivered-To: patchwork-incoming@bilbo.ozlabs.org Authentication-Results: ozlabs.org; spf=pass (mailfrom) smtp.mailfrom=gcc.gnu.org (client-ip=209.132.180.131; helo=sourceware.org; envelope-from=gcc-patches-return-500384-incoming=patchwork.ozlabs.org@gcc.gnu.org; receiver=) Authentication-Results: ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gcc.gnu.org header.i=@gcc.gnu.org header.b="kcl8fSNq"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from sourceware.org (server1.sourceware.org [209.132.180.131]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 450PMM1vsjz9s3q for ; Fri, 10 May 2019 05:59:59 +1000 (AEST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gcc.gnu.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-archive:list-post:list-help:sender:to :from:subject:date:mime-version:message-id:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=yU9htZ+9Zl054KP8 pl/GtkeGffWcAKjxIPH5HtLezj/jriPCNcHMcVmGfErYLO+xt1Drrr7lR5ijAXbe mlVkRYB2eS97EOqDeIpxWUrcaYGavsCnIyvOEeQaHCAtxQS0LLs4ZPsIkmy9/POD v6rqvxp7hSw8vXE/3iOUO+zhZxM= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-archive:list-post:list-help:sender:to :from:subject:date:mime-version:message-id:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=I086Xjs7YeBYV5oZDWnzNz kNb3U=; b=kcl8fSNqyoCMjt+RtDT+9BOXT3Kzy1Vd7Fu6T1Rbbp/UpGRpCQvU3z HsMtm+3ecGx2l99yh26QedVBpbFYHtOJJKLXlnVyFACP8yigXPHrM678wdw/7W0w qel4Mv+4BKMaO/iytkGxbB1DSMgI6+pDjiuBTSNKEibYDgxVjEU1Y= Received: (qmail 16056 invoked by alias); 9 May 2019 19:59:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 16043 invoked by uid 89); 9 May 2019 19:59:52 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-11.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL, BAYES_00, GIT_PATCH_2, GIT_PATCH_3, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=H*c:alternative, visited, H*UA:Macintosh X-HELO: mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (HELO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com) (148.163.158.5) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 May 2019 19:59:51 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098414.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x49JlDQp141224 for ; Thu, 9 May 2019 15:59:47 -0400 Received: from e35.co.us.ibm.com (e35.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.153]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2scrqen31v-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 09 May 2019 15:59:46 -0400 Received: from localhost by e35.co.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Thu, 9 May 2019 20:59:46 +0100 Received: from b03cxnp08025.gho.boulder.ibm.com (9.17.130.17) by e35.co.us.ibm.com (192.168.1.135) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Thu, 9 May 2019 20:59:44 +0100 Received: from b03ledav003.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03ledav003.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.234]) by b03cxnp08025.gho.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id x49JxhDM5242990 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 9 May 2019 19:59:43 GMT Received: from b03ledav003.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86CB36A047 for ; Thu, 9 May 2019 19:59:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b03ledav003.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AD346A05A for ; Thu, 9 May 2019 19:59:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: from BigMac.local (unknown [9.85.181.230]) by b03ledav003.gho.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Thu, 9 May 2019 19:59:43 +0000 (GMT) To: GCC Patches From: Bill Schmidt Subject: [doc, committed] Remove stale reference to FOR_EACH_LOOP_BREAK Date: Thu, 9 May 2019 14:59:42 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 x-cbid: 19050919-0012-0000-0000-000017345713 X-IBM-SpamModules-Scores: X-IBM-SpamModules-Versions: BY=3.00011078; HX=3.00000242; KW=3.00000007; PH=3.00000004; SC=3.00000285; SDB=6.01200967; UDB=6.00630184; IPR=6.00981857; MB=3.00026818; MTD=3.00000008; XFM=3.00000015; UTC=2019-05-09 19:59:45 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19050919-0013-0000-0000-000057339A3B Message-Id: <09fc2fb4-e5c7-5729-3196-7670644f8077@linux.ibm.com> Hi, We removed FOR_EACH_LOOP_BREAK from the compiler six years ago, but it still shows up in the internals manual. Fix that. Tested, committed as obvious. Thanks, Bill 2019-05-09 Bill Schmidt * doc/loop.texi: Remove reference to FOR_EACH_LOOP_BREAK. Index: gcc/doc/loop.texi =================================================================== --- gcc/doc/loop.texi (revision 269976) +++ gcc/doc/loop.texi (working copy) @@ -86,10 +86,7 @@ the direction of traversal and the set of loops vi guaranteed to be visited exactly once, regardless of the changes to the loop tree, and the loops may be removed during the traversal. The newly created loops are never traversed, if they need to be visited, this -must be done separately after their creation. The @code{FOR_EACH_LOOP} -macro allocates temporary variables. If the @code{FOR_EACH_LOOP} loop -were ended using break or goto, they would not be released; -@code{FOR_EACH_LOOP_BREAK} macro must be used instead. +must be done separately after their creation. Each basic block contains the reference to the innermost loop it belongs to (@code{loop_father}). For this reason, it is only possible to have