On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 12:07 AM, Dehao Chen <de...@google.com> wrote:
> Ping...
>
> Richard, could you shed some lights on this?
>
> Thanks,
> Dehao
>
> On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 8:29 PM, Dehao Chen <de...@google.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This patch fixes the source location for automatically generated calls
>> to deallocator. For example:
>>
>> 19 void foo(int i)
>> 20 {
>> 21 for (int j = 0; j < 10; j++)
>> 22 {
>> 23 t test;
>> 24 test.foo();
>> 25 if (i + j)
>> 26 {
>> 27 test.bar();
>> 28 return;
>> 29 }
>> 30 }
>> 31 return;
>> 32 }
>>
>> The deallocator for "23 t test" is called in two places: Line 28 and
>> line 30. However, gcc attributes both callsites to line 30.
>>
>> Bootstrapped and passed gcc regression tests.
>>
>> Is it ok for trunk?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Dehao
>>
>> gcc/ChangeLog
>>
>> 2012-07-31 Dehao Chen <de...@google.com>
>>
>> * tree-eh.c (goto_queue_node): New field.
>> (record_in_goto_queue): New parameter.
>> (record_in_goto_queue_label): New parameter.
>> (lower_try_finally_copy): Update source location.
>>
>> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
>>
>> 2012-07-31 Dehao Chen <de...@google.com>
>>
>> * g++.dg/guality/deallocator.C: New test.
>>
>> Index: gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/guality/deallocator.C
>> ===================================================================
>> --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/guality/deallocator.C (revision 0)
>> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/guality/deallocator.C (revision 0)
>> @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
>> +// Test that debug info generated for auto-inserted deallocator is
>> +// correctly attributed.
>> +// This patch scans for the lineno directly from assembly, which may
>> +// differ between different architectures. Because it mainly tests
>> +// FE generated debug info, without losing generality, only x86
>> +// assembly is scanned in this test.
>> +// { dg-do compile { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } } }
>> +// { dg-options "-O2 -fno-exceptions -g" }
>> +
>> +struct t {
>> + t ();
>> + ~t ();
>> + void foo();
>> + void bar();
>> +};
>> +
>> +int bar();
>> +
>> +void foo(int i)
>> +{
>> + for (int j = 0; j < 10; j++)
>> + {
>> + t test;
>> + test.foo();
>> + if (i + j)
>> + {
>> + test.bar();
>> + return;
>> + }
>> + }
>> + return;
>> +}
>> +// { dg-final { scan-assembler "1 28 0" } }
>> Index: gcc/tree-eh.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- gcc/tree-eh.c (revision 189835)
>> +++ gcc/tree-eh.c (working copy)
>> @@ -321,6 +321,7 @@
>> struct goto_queue_node
>> {
>> treemple stmt;
>> + enum gimple_code code;
>> gimple_seq repl_stmt;
>> gimple cont_stmt;
>> int index;
>> @@ -560,7 +561,8 @@
>> record_in_goto_queue (struct leh_tf_state *tf,
>> treemple new_stmt,
>> int index,
>> - bool is_label)
>> + bool is_label,
>> + enum gimple_code code)
>> {
>> size_t active, size;
>> struct goto_queue_node *q;
>> @@ -583,6 +585,7 @@
>> memset (q, 0, sizeof (*q));
>> q->stmt = new_stmt;
>> q->index = index;
>> + q->code = code;
>> q->is_label = is_label;
>> }
>>
>> @@ -590,7 +593,8 @@
>> TF is not null. */
>>
>> static void
>> -record_in_goto_queue_label (struct leh_tf_state *tf, treemple stmt, tree
>> label)
>> +record_in_goto_queue_label (struct leh_tf_state *tf, treemple stmt, tree
>> label,
>> + enum gimple_code code)
>> {
>> int index;
>> treemple temp, new_stmt;
>> @@ -629,7 +633,7 @@
>> since with a GIMPLE_COND we have an easy access to the then/else
>> labels. */
>> new_stmt = stmt;
>> - record_in_goto_queue (tf, new_stmt, index, true);
>> + record_in_goto_queue (tf, new_stmt, index, true, code);
>> }
>>
>> /* For any GIMPLE_GOTO or GIMPLE_RETURN, decide whether it leaves a
>> try_finally
>> @@ -649,19 +653,22 @@
>> {
>> case GIMPLE_COND:
>> new_stmt.tp = gimple_op_ptr (stmt, 2);
>> - record_in_goto_queue_label (tf, new_stmt, gimple_cond_true_label
>> (stmt));
>> + record_in_goto_queue_label (tf, new_stmt, gimple_cond_true_label
>> (stmt),
>> + gimple_code (stmt));
>> new_stmt.tp = gimple_op_ptr (stmt, 3);
>> - record_in_goto_queue_label (tf, new_stmt,
>> gimple_cond_false_label (stmt));
>> + record_in_goto_queue_label (tf, new_stmt, gimple_cond_false_label
>> (stmt),
>> + gimple_code (stmt));
>> break;
>> case GIMPLE_GOTO:
>> new_stmt.g = stmt;
>> - record_in_goto_queue_label (tf, new_stmt, gimple_goto_dest (stmt));
>> + record_in_goto_queue_label (tf, new_stmt, gimple_goto_dest (stmt),
>> + gimple_code (stmt));
>> break;
>>
>> case GIMPLE_RETURN:
>> tf->may_return = true;
>> new_stmt.g = stmt;
>> - record_in_goto_queue (tf, new_stmt, -1, false);
>> + record_in_goto_queue (tf, new_stmt, -1, false, gimple_code (stmt));
>> break;
>>
>> default:
>> @@ -1234,6 +1241,7 @@
>> for (index = 0; index < return_index + 1; index++)
>> {
>> tree lab;
>> + gimple_stmt_iterator gsi;
>>
>> q = labels[index].q;
>> if (! q)
>> @@ -1252,6 +1260,11 @@
>>
>> seq = lower_try_finally_dup_block (finally, state);
>> lower_eh_constructs_1 (state, &seq);
>> + for (gsi = gsi_start (seq); !gsi_end_p (gsi); gsi_next (&gsi))
>> + gimple_set_location (gsi_stmt (gsi),
>> + q->code == GIMPLE_COND ?
>> + EXPR_LOCATION (*q->stmt.tp) :
>> + gimple_location (q->stmt.g));
given this use it would be nicer if you'd record a location in the queue instead
of a gimple-code. Also as both lower_eh_constructs_1 and
lower_try_finally_dup_block already walk over all stmts it would be
nice to avoid
the extra walk ... especially as it looks like that other callers of
lower_try_finally_dup_block may also be affected (is re-setting
_every_ stmt location
really ok in all cases?). So it feels like
lower_try_finally_dup_block should be
the function to re-set the locations.
Other than the above I don't know the code very well.
Thanks,
Richard.
>> gimple_seq_add_seq (&new_stmt, seq);
>>
>> gimple_seq_add_stmt (&new_stmt, q->cont_stmt);
