On 04/19/2015 09:10 PM, Alan Modra wrote:
This patch removes bogus debug info left around by shrink-wrapping,
which on some powerpc targets with just the right register allocation
led to assembly errors.
Bootstrapped and regression tested powerpc64-linux and x86_64-linux.
I did see some regressions, but completely unrelated to this patch.
See pr65810 for the powerpc64 regressions. x86_64-linux showed fails
of
+FAIL: c-c++-common/ubsan/object-size-10.c -O2 execution test
+FAIL: c-c++-common/ubsan/object-size-10.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin
-flto-partition=none execution test
+FAIL: c-c++-common/ubsan/object-size-10.c -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin
-fno-fat-lto-objects execution test
+FAIL: gfortran.dg/class_allocate_18.f90 -O0 execution test
+FAIL: gfortran.dg/class_allocate_18.f90 -O1 execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/class_allocate_18.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
-funroll-all-loops -finline-functions execution test
-FAIL: gfortran.dg/class_allocate_18.f90 -Os execution test
+FAIL: gfortran.dg/class_allocate_18.f90 -O3 -g execution test
with the log for the ubsan fails
/src/gcc-5/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/ubsan/object-size-10.c:19:11: runtime
error: index 128 out of bounds for type 'char [128]'
/src/gcc-5/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/ubsan/object-size-10.c:19:11: runtime
error: load of address 0x0804a000 with insufficient space for an object of type
'char'
0x0804a000: note: pointer points here
<memory cannot be printed>
I assume I was thrashing my ubuntu 14.10 x86_64 box too hard and just
ran out of memory. Running the test by hand resulted in the expected
output.
The class_allocate_18.f90 failure are intermittent, and occur
occasionally when running the testcase by hand. :-(
Yea, I think folks are still trying to sort out what's happening with
class_allocate_18.f90.
gcc/
PR debug/65779
* shrink-wrap.c (insn_uses_reg): New function.
(move_insn_for_shrink_wrap): Remove debug insns using regs set
by the moved insn.
gcc/testsuite/
* gcc.dg/pr65779.c: New.
Index: gcc/shrink-wrap.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/shrink-wrap.c (revision 222160)
+++ gcc/shrink-wrap.c (working copy)
@@ -182,6 +182,21 @@ live_edge_for_reg (basic_block bb, int regno, int
return live_edge;
}
+static bool
+insn_uses_reg (rtx_insn *insn, unsigned int regno, unsigned int end_regno)
+{
+ df_ref use;
+
+ FOR_EACH_INSN_USE (use, insn)
+ {
+ rtx reg = DF_REF_REG (use);
+
+ if (REG_P (reg) && REGNO (reg) >= regno && REGNO (reg) < end_regno)
+ return true;
+ }
+ return false;
+}
Need a comment for this function.
So just one question. Why handle the split case differently? In the
split case you effectively move the debug insn to the new block. In the
!split case, you just delete the debug insn.
I'm sure there's a reason, it would be worth noting it as a comment in
this code.
OK with the comments added.
jeff
