From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24446 invoked by alias); 28 May 2012 15:53:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 24432 invoked by uid 22791); 28 May 2012 15:53:22 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00,SUBJ_OBFU_PUNCT_FEW,SUBJ_OBFU_PUNCT_MANY 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; Mon, 28 May 2012 15:53:09 +0000 From: "hp at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/53508] New: function.c:stack_protect_epilogue call to predict_insn_def with wrong direction of prediction Date: Mon, 28 May 2012 16:00:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: new X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: rtl-optimization X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: hp 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: --- X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: 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: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2012-05/txt/msg02654.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53508 Bug #: 53508 Summary: function.c:stack_protect_epilogue call to predict_insn_def with wrong direction of prediction Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-05/msg01361.htm l Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: rtl-optimization AssignedTo: unassigned@gcc.gnu.org ReportedBy: hp@gcc.gnu.org The message at the URL and the (original) summary says it all; the branch is *around* a noreturn call, so the call to predict_insn_def has the prediction direction inverted. The doc wrong too; corrected with revision 187934 on trunk. The buglet is as far back as the 4.3-branch. The generated code has the call moved to a "cold" position, so the generated code does not seem to be affected in the trivial case.