From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-378764-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 9790 invoked by alias); 4 Jan 2012 21:26:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 9779 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Jan 2012 21:26:40 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.9 required=5.0	tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 21:26:28 +0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug bootstrap/51648] [4.7 Regression] Profiledbootstrap failure on x86_64-linux
Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2012 21:26:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: bootstrap
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.7.0
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-51648-4-x060Q84gW4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-51648-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-51648-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2012-01/txt/msg00439.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51648

--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-01-04 21:26:11 UTC ---
I think the problem is that we have a noreturn call (in the short testcase
fatal_error), which doesn't have EDGE_FAKE to exit added by
add_noreturn_fake_exit_edges because it has successor edge (EDGE_EH), and
isn't added by gimple_flow_call_edges_add, because that function ignores
noreturn calls.  So, either we don't ignore noreturn calls that have any
non-fake edges in gimple_flow_call_edges_add, or change
add_noreturn_fake_exit_edges.
Honza, what do you prefer?
Changing gimple_flow_call_edges_add will only affect profile feedback I think,
while add_noreturn_fake_exit_edges will affect several other passes (sm, gcse,
...).