public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug lto/47497] [4.6 Regression] SPEC CPU 2006 failed to link with LTO -fuse-linker-plugin -fwhole-program Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 15:22:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-47497-4-iaIhJ8sNqV@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-47497-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47497 --- Comment #14 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-02-26 14:32:42 UTC --- The problem is in the alias merging code in lto-symtab. It does: alias->thunk.alias = prevailing_node->decl; that is wrong for thunks, as for thunks pointing to thunk (like this one) the alias is not the decl of function thunk is associated for but decl of thunk. Fixing this problem however leads to futher problems (ICE at ltrans streaming in time, because we merge aliases incorrectly...) I don't think the aliases should be merged actually, just the aliases associated with prevailed decl removed. thunk.alias should always point to the prevailing decl, but I guess if we just drop aliases from other definitions this should just work. Jakub, what was logic for the current alias merging code? The problem in soplex is that function in question is comdat and it has two actual definitions. With decl merging we mix together local label for thunk from the first definition with local label for the thunk from second definition. It bit surprises me how this happens, given that the aliases should match and we should consistently choose one or another. Honza
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-02-26 14:33 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2011-01-27 21:23 [Bug lto/47497] New: [4.6 Regression] SPEC CPU 2006 failed to link with LTO hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-01-27 22:21 ` [Bug lto/47497] " hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-01-27 23:14 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-01-28 12:37 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-28 12:41 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-28 14:08 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-01-28 14:46 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-30 17:56 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz 2011-02-06 17:42 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-02-08 14:52 ` [Bug lto/47497] [4.6 Regression] SPEC CPU 2006 failed to link with LTO -fuse-linker-plugin -fwhole-program rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-12 13:05 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-25 23:07 ` steven at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-26 9:38 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz 2011-02-26 11:18 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-26 14:01 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-26 15:22 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2011-02-28 9:14 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-28 9:25 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz 2011-02-28 9:25 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-01 19:08 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-01 19:09 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04 18:50 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04 18:51 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-47497-4-iaIhJ8sNqV@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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).