Ping ? Thanks, Kugan
> On 21 Jan 2026, at 8:18 pm, Kugan Vivekanandarajah <[email protected]> > wrote: > > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments > Hi Honza, > > > On 13 Jan 2026, at 7:58 pm, Jan Hubicka <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments > > > > > >> Hi Andrew, > >> > >>> On 6 Jan 2026, at 7:10 pm, Andrew Pinski <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments > >>> > >>> > >>> On Sun, Jan 4, 2026 at 11:11 PM Kugan Vivekanandarajah > >>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> [PR ipa/123383] shows in ICE speculative call sequence has > >>>> speculative_id 256 out of range with LTO. > >>>> This also shows up lot profile bootstrapping gcc. > >>>> > >>>> Fix by checking lto_stmt_uid in get_next_speculative_id as done in other > >>>> places too. > >>> > >>> LGTM based on the previous similar fix (PR93318, r10-6074) where it > >>> is mentioned that only one or the other will be set. So you need to > >>> compare both. > >>> It would be useful to add the (semi-big) testcase I added to the bug > >>> report as a (semi) bigger LTO C++ example. > >>> > >> Thanks for the review. Attached patch adds the test case from the PR. > >> Is this OK? > > > > The specualtive_id should be unique only within on speculative id block > > which can be iterated by first_speculative_call_target and > > next_speculative_call_target, so there is no need to walk the whole list > > of edges > > > > Please see the attached to patch which changes this. > > Bootstrap and regression testing are ongoing. Is this OK if no regression? > > Thanks, > Kugan > > > <0001-Use-next_speculative_call_target-in-get_next_specula.patch>
