[Bug lto/57602] New: Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422

[Bug lto/57602] New: Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422

[izamyatin at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602

            Bug ID: 57602
           Summary: Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000
                    for i686 with -flto after r199422
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.9.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: lto
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: izamyatin at gmail dot com
                CC: jh at suse dot cz
            Target: i686

For instance, 164.gzip has Segmentation fault. (tried on trunk, revision
200055)

Compiler options

-m32 -Ofast -flto -funroll-loops -msse2 -mfpmath=sse.

[Bug lto/57602] Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422

[ysrumyan at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602

Yuri Rumyantsev <ysrumyan at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |ysrumyan at gmail dot com

--- Comment #1 from Yuri Rumyantsev <ysrumyan at gmail dot com> ---
We also got a lot of run-time failures on eembc2.0 if it was compiled with -O3
-flto since wrong argument passing for clone (local) function:

before the fix we have

8048f7d:    b8 a0 a8 10 08           mov    $0x810a8a0,%eax
 8048f82:    e8 19 5d 00 00           call   804eca0 <set_cmd_line.lto_priv.21>

i.e. argument is passed in AX register.
after fix we have

8048f7d:    c7 04 24 a0 a8 10 08     movl   $0x810a8a0,(%esp)
 8048f84:    e8 87 5c 00 00           call   804ec10 <set_cmd_line.lto_priv.21>

i.e. argument is passed on stack but function assumes that it is on register.

Note also that incremental fix proposed by Richard did not help.

[Bug lto/57602] Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422

[izamyatin at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602

--- Comment #4 from Igor Zamyatin <izamyatin at gmail dot com> ---
Created attachment 30377
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30377&action=edit
Untested patch that corrects the cleanup

[Bug lto/57602] Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422

[izamyatin at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602

Igor Zamyatin <izamyatin at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |hubicka at ucw dot cz

--- Comment #3 from Igor Zamyatin <izamyatin at gmail dot com> ---
I believe the problem happens because cleanup that was made in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-05/msg01644.html
sometimes changes field 'analyzed' to 'symbol.definition' but at the same time
in other places to 'symbol.analyzed'.
It looks like 'symbol.definition' corresponds to the former 'finalized' field
not 'analyzed' and 'symbol.definition' are not always the same as
'symbol.analyzed'.

I'm attaching the patch (no bootstrap and make check testing though) which
fixes this (but not in all places across the compiler, sort of minimum
intrusion) and runfails disappeared with these changes.

Jan, could you please take a close look since now many x86 32-bit apps built
with lto are broken.

[Bug lto/57602] Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422

[jh at suse dot cz]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602

--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz> ---
As described in patch the change is intentional. finalized/analyzed  
flags come from pre unit at a time. ipa code should not care about  
analyzed bit. i will look what broke.

Honza
Cituji izamyatin at gmail dot com <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>:

> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602
>
> Igor Zamyatin <izamyatin at gmail dot com> changed:
>
>            What    |Removed                     |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                  CC|                            |hubicka at ucw dot cz
>
> --- Comment #3 from Igor Zamyatin <izamyatin at gmail dot com> ---
> I believe the problem happens because cleanup that was made in
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-05/msg01644.html
> sometimes changes field 'analyzed' to 'symbol.definition' but at the  
> same time
> in other places to 'symbol.analyzed'.
> It looks like 'symbol.definition' corresponds to the former 'finalized' field
> not 'analyzed' and 'symbol.definition' are not always the same as
> 'symbol.analyzed'.
>
> I'm attaching the patch (no bootstrap and make check testing though) which
> fixes this (but not in all places across the compiler, sort of minimum
> intrusion) and runfails disappeared with these changes.
>
> Jan, could you please take a close look since now many x86 32-bit apps built
> with lto are broken.
>
> --
> You are receiving this mail because:
> You are on the CC list for the bug.
>

[Bug lto/57602] Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422

[izamyatin at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602

--- Comment #6 from Igor Zamyatin <izamyatin at gmail dot com> ---
Jan, have you had a chance to look at the problem?

[Bug lto/57602] [4.9 Regression] Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422

[ubizjak at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602

Uroš Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2013-07-22
   Target Milestone|---                         |4.9.0
            Summary|Runfails for several C/C++  |[4.9 Regression] Runfails
                   |benchmarks from spec2000    |for several C/C++
                   |for i686 with -flto after   |benchmarks from spec2000
                   |r199422                     |for i686 with -flto after
                   |                            |r199422
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #7 from Uroš Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> ---
Confirmed, a 4.9 regression.
>From gcc-bugs-return-426478-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Jul 22 10:25:44 2013
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-426478-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 27658 invoked by alias); 22 Jul 2013 10:25:43 -0000
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
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 23853 invoked by uid 48); 22 Jul 2013 10:23:42 -0000
From: "paolo.carlini at oracle dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/57948] internal compiler error: in initialize_reference, at cp/call.c:9285
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 10:25:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: keywords bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on everconfirmed
Message-ID: <bug-57948-4-S6HTDsyIqp@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-57948-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-57948-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2013-07/txt/msg00985.txt.bz2
Content-length: 475

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idW948

Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |ice-on-invalid-code
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2013-07-22
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

[Bug lto/57602] [4.9 Regression] Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422

[d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602

--- Comment #8 from Dmitry Gorbachev <d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com> ---
And a testcase from PR57879 fails with -O2 / -O1 and -flto, it happens when
building GCC itself.

[Bug lto/57602] [4.9 Regression] Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422

[d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602

Dmitry Gorbachev <d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com

--- Comment #9 from Dmitry Gorbachev <d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com> ---
*** Bug 57879 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug lto/57602] [4.9 Regression] Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422

[hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602

Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
                 CC|                            |hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
           Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org      |hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #10 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Mine...

[Bug lto/57602] [4.9 Regression] Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422

[hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602

--- Comment #11 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 30616
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30616&action=edit
Proposed fix

Patch I am testing. The problem was that ltrans passes got overzelaous on
clearing local flags.  I think this bug was there for a while, I wonder why it
did not hit us before.

The patch fixes the testcase seen in one of dups of this PR, does it fix all of
SPEC?

[Bug lto/57602] [4.9 Regression] Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422

[ysrumyan at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602

--- Comment #12 from Yuri Rumyantsev <ysrumyan at gmail dot com> ---
Jan,

I tried to test your fix and got the following error message while
building trunk compiler (with your fix):

../../../../../trunk/libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/fstream-inst.cc:48:1:
error: node is alias but not definition
 } // namespace
 ^
_ZNSt9basic_iosIwSt11char_traitsIwEED1Ev/764 (std::basic_ios<_CharT,
_Traits>::~basic_ios() [with _CharT = wchar_t; _Traits =
std::char_traits<wchar_t>]) @0x7f1375b1be40
  Type: function alias cpp_implicit_alias
  Visibility: external public visibility_specified
  Address is taken.
  References:
  Referring:
  Availability: not_available
  Function flags:
  Called by:
  Calls:
../../../../../trunk/libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/fstream-inst.cc:48:1:
internal compiler error: verify_cgraph_node failed
0x7dc6b1 verify_cgraph_node(cgraph_node*)
        ../../trunk/gcc/cgraph.c:2621
0x7d6567 verify_symtab_node(symtab_node_def*)
        ../../trunk/gcc/symtab.c:763
0x7d65a7 verify_symtab()
        ../../trunk/gcc/symtab.c:780
0x98118b symtab_remove_unreachable_nodes(bool, _IO_FILE*)
        ../../trunk/gcc/ipa.c:477
0xf33f20 ipa_inline
        ../../trunk/gcc/ipa-inline.c:1800
Please submit a full bug report,

Please, let me know if more info is needed.

2013/8/5 hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602
>
> --- Comment #11 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> Created attachment 30616
>   --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30616&action=edit
> Proposed fix
>
> Patch I am testing. The problem was that ltrans passes got overzelaous on
> clearing local flags.  I think this bug was there for a while, I wonder why it
> did not hit us before.
>
> The patch fixes the testcase seen in one of dups of this PR, does it fix all of
> SPEC?
>
> --
> You are receiving this mail because:
> You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug lto/57602] [4.9 Regression] Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422

[hubicka at ucw dot cz]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602

--- Comment #13 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz> ---
> Please, let me know if more info is needed.
Actually I got the same ICE in meantime.  Here is improved patch (it is still
testing for me)

Index: cgraph.c
===================================================================
*** cgraph.c    (revision 201483)
--- cgraph.c    (working copy)
*************** verify_cgraph_node (struct cgraph_node *
*** 2363,2369 ****
        error ("inline clone in same comdat group list");
        error_found = true;
      }
!   if (!node->symbol.definition && node->local.local)
      {
        error ("local symbols must be defined");
        error_found = true;
--- 2363,2369 ----
        error ("inline clone in same comdat group list");
        error_found = true;
      }
!   if (!node->symbol.definition && !node->symbol.in_other_partition &&
node->local.local)
      {
        error ("local symbols must be defined");
        error_found = true;
Index: ipa.c
===================================================================
*** ipa.c    (revision 201483)
--- ipa.c    (working copy)
*************** symtab_remove_unreachable_nodes (bool be
*** 376,382 ****
          {
            if (file)
          fprintf (file, " %s", cgraph_node_name (node));
!           cgraph_reset_node (node);
            changed = true;
          }
      }
--- 376,390 ----
          {
            if (file)
          fprintf (file, " %s", cgraph_node_name (node));
!           node->symbol.analyzed = false;
!           node->symbol.definition = false;
!           node->symbol.cpp_implicit_alias = false;
!           node->symbol.alias = false;
!           node->symbol.weakref = false;
!           if (!node->symbol.in_other_partition)
!         node->local.local = false;
!           cgraph_node_remove_callees (node);
!           ipa_remove_all_references (&node->symbol.ref_list);
            changed = true;
          }
      }
*************** function_and_variable_visibility (bool w
*** 888,894 ****
      }
    FOR_EACH_DEFINED_FUNCTION (node)
      {
!       node->local.local = cgraph_local_node_p (node);

        /* If we know that function can not be overwritten by a different
semantics
       and moreover its section can not be discarded, replace all direct calls
--- 896,902 ----
      }
    FOR_EACH_DEFINED_FUNCTION (node)
      {
!       node->local.local |= cgraph_local_node_p (node);

        /* If we know that function can not be overwritten by a different
semantics
       and moreover its section can not be discarded, replace all direct calls

[Bug lto/57602] [4.9 Regression] Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422

[ysrumyan at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602

--- Comment #14 from Yuri Rumyantsev <ysrumyan at gmail dot com> ---
Hi Jan,

I checked that  all benches from spec2000 are run successfully with
-flto options and eembc_2_0 suite was also run sucessfully with lto
(for 32-bit mode).

So go ahead and commit your fix.

Best regards.
Yuri.

2013/8/5 hubicka at ucw dot cz <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602
>
> --- Comment #13 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz> ---
>> Please, let me know if more info is needed.
> Actually I got the same ICE in meantime.  Here is improved patch (it is still
> testing for me)
>
> Index: cgraph.c
> ===================================================================
> *** cgraph.c    (revision 201483)
> --- cgraph.c    (working copy)
> *************** verify_cgraph_node (struct cgraph_node *
> *** 2363,2369 ****
>         error ("inline clone in same comdat group list");
>         error_found = true;
>       }
> !   if (!node->symbol.definition && node->local.local)
>       {
>         error ("local symbols must be defined");
>         error_found = true;
> --- 2363,2369 ----
>         error ("inline clone in same comdat group list");
>         error_found = true;
>       }
> !   if (!node->symbol.definition && !node->symbol.in_other_partition &&
> node->local.local)
>       {
>         error ("local symbols must be defined");
>         error_found = true;
> Index: ipa.c
> ===================================================================
> *** ipa.c    (revision 201483)
> --- ipa.c    (working copy)
> *************** symtab_remove_unreachable_nodes (bool be
> *** 376,382 ****
>           {
>             if (file)
>           fprintf (file, " %s", cgraph_node_name (node));
> !           cgraph_reset_node (node);
>             changed = true;
>           }
>       }
> --- 376,390 ----
>           {
>             if (file)
>           fprintf (file, " %s", cgraph_node_name (node));
> !           node->symbol.analyzed = false;
> !           node->symbol.definition = false;
> !           node->symbol.cpp_implicit_alias = false;
> !           node->symbol.alias = false;
> !           node->symbol.weakref = false;
> !           if (!node->symbol.in_other_partition)
> !         node->local.local = false;
> !           cgraph_node_remove_callees (node);
> !           ipa_remove_all_references (&node->symbol.ref_list);
>             changed = true;
>           }
>       }
> *************** function_and_variable_visibility (bool w
> *** 888,894 ****
>       }
>     FOR_EACH_DEFINED_FUNCTION (node)
>       {
> !       node->local.local = cgraph_local_node_p (node);
>
>         /* If we know that function can not be overwritten by a different
> semantics
>        and moreover its section can not be discarded, replace all direct calls
> --- 896,902 ----
>       }
>     FOR_EACH_DEFINED_FUNCTION (node)
>       {
> !       node->local.local |= cgraph_local_node_p (node);
>
>         /* If we know that function can not be overwritten by a different
> semantics
>        and moreover its section can not be discarded, replace all direct calls
>
> --
> You are receiving this mail because:
> You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug lto/57602] [4.9 Regression] Runfails for several C/C++ benchmarks from spec2000 for i686 with -flto after r199422

[hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57602

Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED

--- Comment #15 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed thus.