public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "abel at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/56957] [4.9 regression] ICE in add_insn_after, at emit-rtl.c:3783
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 10:03:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-56957-4-2lN9itKOKL@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-56957-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56957

Andrey Belevantsev <abel at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #29886|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |

--- Comment #9 from Andrey Belevantsev <abel at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-04-25 10:03:38 UTC ---
Created attachment 29937
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29937
new patch

Actually, on more thought I couldn't recall why did we need all the
insn_emitted and EXPR_WAS_CHANGED stuff (that was 5 years ago).  The code
should decide whether do we need to move the scheduling insn from below and
leave the same UID or we need to emit the new insn with the new UID.  The
current code says that the insn needs to have the same UID as the above
resulting expression, we shouldn't create any extra stuff (renaming copies,
speculative checks) at the place of the original insn, and the insn itself
should not be changed while it was being propagated up to the place of
scheduling.  However, for the last two cases (new insns created, scheduling
insn changed) the UIDs will not match, as the insn pattern would be changed
while moving up, so their check doesn't add anything new to the UID check.  And
indeed, the attached patch that only checks for UIDs passes all the tests for
me.

I will discuss this more with Alexander and will commit after additional
testing on x86_64 as appropriate.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-04-25 10:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-04-14 19:40 [Bug rtl-optimization/56957] New: " schwab@linux-m68k.org
2013-04-15 10:12 ` [Bug rtl-optimization/56957] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-04-16 20:22 ` steven at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-04-16 20:35 ` steven at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-04-16 20:54 ` steven at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-04-16 21:36 ` steven at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-04-17  5:14 ` abel at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-04-17  6:52 ` abel at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-04-18  9:08 ` steven at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-04-18  9:18 ` abel at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-04-22  9:48 ` abel at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-04-25 10:03 ` abel at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2013-04-30 10:58 ` abel 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-56957-4-2lN9itKOKL@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).