public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/51771] trans-mem: abnormal edges get lost or corrupted
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2012 16:40:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-51771-4-rGqzadziLh@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-51771-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51771

Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2012-06-01
     Ever Confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #5 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-06-01 16:39:12 UTC ---
This is a mental note for whenever we decide to pick this up again...

The current approach with the returns-twice patch is a bit heavy handed, as the
register allocator will more-or-less give up across returns-twice.  With the
appropriate abnormal edges, the allocator will get more exact info.  Whether or
not it's able to do anything extra with this info is a different story... 
That's why, we should drop this to ultra low priority-- the returns-twice
approach is good enough.

However, when someone gets bored, the way to debug this is with any trivial
testcase:

  int glob;
  foo()
  {
    __transaction_atomic { glob=666; }
  }

If one reverts the returns-twice patch referenced in this PR, one sees the
abnormal edges all the way up to *.c.*t.optimized.  The edges get corrupted
somewhere in the RTL passes.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-06-01 16:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-01-05 23:44 [Bug rtl-optimization/51771] New: " torvald at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-05 23:49 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/51771] " torvald at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-17 23:58 ` patrick.marlier at gmail dot com
2012-01-31 13:35 ` torvald at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-31 13:56 ` torvald at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-05-03 15:07 ` luked at cs dot rochester.edu
2012-06-01 16:40 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2012-06-01 16:47 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-06-01 16:53 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-06-04 16:09 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-11-29 17:05 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-12-03 18:43 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-12-03 18:52 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-12-05 19:19 ` torvald 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-51771-4-rGqzadziLh@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: link
Be 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).