Best regards, Josef Melcr Dne 24. 10. 24 v 19:45 Josef Melcr napsal(a):
Capital Remove The second line should be just tab indented, not tab + 2 spaces, and finished with dot. gomp_parallel rather than gomp-parallel.Sorry about the formatting issues, I didn't notice them.The GIMPLE_OMP_TASK case went under my radar, since I was primarily focused on gomp_parallel statements. I'll try these changes and retest.The if (gimple_code (stmt) == GIMPLE_OMP_TASK) case should go as well.Wonder if gcc_checking_assert (!is_gimple_omp (stmt)); wouldn't be useful as replacement at least for some time to verify it isn't needed (but if itwould be needed, we miss various other GIMPLE_OMP_* statements).Best regards, Josef Melcr Dne 24. 10. 24 v 18:49 Jakub Jelinek napsal(a):On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 04:37:24PM +0200, Josef Melcr wrote:This patch removes a dead if statement checking for gomp-parallel gimple statements. This if is in the execute method of build_cgraph_edges pass,which is executed right after the omp_expand pass, which removes these gimple statements and replaces them with simple gcalls, making this if practically dead. Some TSan tests are failing with this patch, but I don't think thischange is likely to cause these failures. Additionally, the failures arenot consistent across runs, making me think these failures are abug in TSan itself. All other tests are ok. Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.OK for master ? gcc/ChangeLog: * cgraphbuild.cc (pass_build_cgraph_edges::execute): remove ifCapital Removestatement checking for gomp-parallel statementsThe second line should be just tab indented, not tab + 2 spaces, and finished with dot. gomp_parallel rather than gomp-parallel.--- a/gcc/cgraphbuild.cc +++ b/gcc/cgraphbuild.cc @@ -340,12 +340,6 @@ pass_build_cgraph_edges::execute (function *fun) bb->count); } node->record_stmt_references (stmt);- if (gomp_parallel *omp_par_stmt = dyn_cast <gomp_parallel *> (stmt))- { - tree fn = gimple_omp_parallel_child_fn (omp_par_stmt); - node->create_reference (cgraph_node::get_create (fn), - IPA_REF_ADDR, stmt); - } if (gimple_code (stmt) == GIMPLE_OMP_TASK) { tree fn = gimple_omp_task_child_fn (stmt);The if (gimple_code (stmt) == GIMPLE_OMP_TASK) case should go as well.Wonder if gcc_checking_assert (!is_gimple_omp (stmt)); wouldn't be useful as replacement at least for some time to verify it isn't needed (but if itwould be needed, we miss various other GIMPLE_OMP_* statements). Jakub
smime.p7s
Description: Elektronicky podpis S/MIME