public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug middle-end/106467] New: [OpenMP] Wrong code with collapse – tree sharing issue.
@ 2022-07-28 16:08 burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-07-28 16:44 ` [Bug middle-end/106467] " burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 more replies)
0 siblings, 5 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-07-28 16:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106467
Bug ID: 106467
Summary: [OpenMP] Wrong code with collapse – tree sharing
issue.
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code, openmp
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: burnus at gcc dot gnu.org, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org
Depends on: 106449
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 53375
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53375&action=edit
Testcase, modified version of libgomp.c-c++-common/pr106449.c from attachment
53370 to PR 106449
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #106449 +++
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from bug 106449 comment #9)
> Created attachment 53370 [details]
> gcc13-pr106449-2.patch
>
> Updated fix for this PR which fixes even the runtime case (it was caused by
> missing unsharing and regimplification clobbering a shared tree).
My potentially wrong impression is that the unshare_tree issue also exists
with a bare collapse.
At least, when converting the testcase from the patch to one which uses 'FOR'
instead of '(FOR) SIMD', it fails for BAR in a similar way as the SIMD version
with the initial version of the patch.
Namely, the result it the __builtin_abort call for i = 24 in bar (n=64, m=128):
33 for (i = 0; i < 32768; i++)
34 if (b[2 * i] != &a[i / 64] || b[2 * i + 1] != &a[(i / 64) + 64 + (i
% 64)])
35 __builtin_abort ();
The LHS of the is false (sub-LHS/sub-RHS are idential) but the RHS, i.e.
b[2 * i + 1] != &a[(i / 64) + 64 + (i % 64)]
fails as
b[2 * i + 1] = 0x7fffffffd588
while
&a[(i / 64) + 64 + (i % 64)] = 0x7fffffffd490
Referenced Bugs:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106449
[Bug 106449] ICE in #pragma omp parallel for simd since
r6-4544-ge01d41e553aae245
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/106467] [OpenMP] Wrong code with collapse – tree sharing issue. 2022-07-28 16:08 [Bug middle-end/106467] New: [OpenMP] Wrong code with collapse – tree sharing issue burnus at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-07-28 16:44 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-07-28 16:45 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org ` (3 subsequent siblings) 4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: burnus at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-07-28 16:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106467 Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #53375|0 |1 is obsolete| | --- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> --- Created attachment 53376 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53376&action=edit Fixed testcase – actually does not fail Seemingly, I was way to fast – I now fixed the testcase and it does not fail. (Issue related to 'linear( :2)'.) Sorry – pilot error → Question: should such a testcase / this testcase be also added to the testsuite? I don't know how well we cover collapse + pointer for 'for'. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/106467] [OpenMP] Wrong code with collapse – tree sharing issue. 2022-07-28 16:08 [Bug middle-end/106467] New: [OpenMP] Wrong code with collapse – tree sharing issue burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-07-28 16:44 ` [Bug middle-end/106467] " burnus at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-07-28 16:45 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-07-28 17:14 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ` (2 subsequent siblings) 4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: burnus at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-07-28 16:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106467 Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |INVALID --- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> --- Close as INVALID. – There surely are more bugs lurking, but not for this testcase. Only open question: * Should such a testcase / this testcase be also added to the testsuite? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/106467] [OpenMP] Wrong code with collapse – tree sharing issue. 2022-07-28 16:08 [Bug middle-end/106467] New: [OpenMP] Wrong code with collapse – tree sharing issue burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-07-28 16:44 ` [Bug middle-end/106467] " burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-07-28 16:45 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-07-28 17:14 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-07-29 10:42 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-11-03 14:10 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-07-28 17:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106467 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> --- I think it wouldn't hurt to add it now that we have it ;) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/106467] [OpenMP] Wrong code with collapse – tree sharing issue. 2022-07-28 16:08 [Bug middle-end/106467] New: [OpenMP] Wrong code with collapse – tree sharing issue burnus at gcc dot gnu.org ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2022-07-28 17:14 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-07-29 10:42 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-11-03 14:10 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: burnus at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-07-29 10:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106467 --- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> --- For completeness, the testcase https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-July/599041.html was committed as https://gcc.gnu.org/r13-1893-g85fe7e7dd1f1461b86d92a3a0c1bfd97a06efcc0 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/106467] [OpenMP] Wrong code with collapse – tree sharing issue. 2022-07-28 16:08 [Bug middle-end/106467] New: [OpenMP] Wrong code with collapse – tree sharing issue burnus at gcc dot gnu.org ` (3 preceding siblings ...) 2022-07-29 10:42 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-11-03 14:10 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-11-03 14:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106467 Bug 106467 depends on bug 106449, which changed state. Bug 106449 Summary: ICE in #pragma omp parallel for simd since r6-4544-ge01d41e553aae245 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106449 What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-11-03 14:10 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2022-07-28 16:08 [Bug middle-end/106467] New: [OpenMP] Wrong code with collapse – tree sharing issue burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-07-28 16:44 ` [Bug middle-end/106467] " burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-07-28 16:45 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-07-28 17:14 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-07-29 10:42 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-11-03 14:10 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).