On Thu 2025-03-20 13:31:38, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Mar 2025, Filip Kastl wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Ok to push if bootstrap and regtest (on x86_64 linux) succeeds?
>
> OK.
>
And I again almost forgot: Can I backport this to releases/gcc-14 branch?
Filip
> > Thanks,
> > Filip Kastl
> >
> >
> > -- 8< --
> >
> >
> > I increment the index variable in a loop even when I do
> > vec::unordered_remove() which causes the vector traversal to miss some
> > elements. Mikael notified me of this mistake I made in my last patch.
> >
> > gcc/ChangeLog:
> >
> > * gimple-ssa-sccopy.cc (scc_copy_prop::propagate): Don't
> > increment after vec::unordered_remove().
> >
> > Reported-by: Mikael Morin <mik...@gcc.gnu.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Filip Kastl <fka...@suse.cz>
> > ---
> > gcc/gimple-ssa-sccopy.cc | 4 +++-
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/gcc/gimple-ssa-sccopy.cc b/gcc/gimple-ssa-sccopy.cc
> > index 298feb05571..ee2a7fa8a72 100644
> > --- a/gcc/gimple-ssa-sccopy.cc
> > +++ b/gcc/gimple-ssa-sccopy.cc
> > @@ -582,9 +582,11 @@ scc_copy_prop::propagate ()
> > get removed. That means parts of CFG get removed. Those may
> > contain copy statements. For that reason we prune SCCs here. */
> > unsigned i;
> > - for (i = 0; i < scc.length (); i++)
> > + for (i = 0; i < scc.length ();)
> > if (gimple_bb (scc[i]) == NULL)
> > scc.unordered_remove (i);
> > + else
> > + i++;
> > if (scc.is_empty ())
> > {
> > scc.release ();
> >
>
> --
> Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de>
> SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH,
> Frankenstrasse 146, 90461 Nuernberg, Germany;
> GF: Ivo Totev, Andrew McDonald, Werner Knoblich; (HRB 36809, AG Nuernberg)
