Conversation
|
Tagging subscribers to this area: @JulieLeeMSFT, @jakobbotsch Issue DetailsThe flag duplicates information already present in the EH table. Also delete some (not all) remnants of verification from
|
5efc53f to
4b2df21
Compare
5ddc9ee to
a6011c1
Compare
The flag duplicates information already present in the EH table. Also delete some remnants of verification from "impVerifyEHBlock".
a6011c1 to
94849dc
Compare
BruceForstall
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's a nice cleanup. A couple notes.
As a follow-up: do you have any thoughts on #82336?
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Only the first block of 'try' regions should have BBF_TRY_BEG set. | ||
| if (!blockTryBegSet[block->bbNum]) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The only use of blockTryBegSet currently is in this check. You could remove it entirely.
| /* Remove unreachable or empty blocks - do not consider blocks marked BBF_DONT_REMOVE or genReturnBB block | ||
| * These include first and last block of a TRY, exception handlers and RANGE_CHECK_FAIL THROW blocks */ | ||
|
|
||
| if ((block->bbFlags & BBF_DONT_REMOVE) == BBF_DONT_REMOVE || block == genReturnBB) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is the genReturnBB check just unnecessary? (obsolete?)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Unnecessary; the block is already always marked with BBF_DONT_REMOVE.
Great question :). I am looking at the EH-related flowgraph things and in particular the ability to remove dead protected regions and handlers. |
|
@SingleAccretion Can you fix the merge conflict? fwiw, all the test failures are "known" |
|
@BruceForstall conflict fixed. |
The flag duplicates information already present in the EH table.
Also delete some (not all) remnants of verification from
impVerifyEHBlock.