From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id 3C2A2384A01E; Wed, 17 Mar 2021 13:30:00 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 3C2A2384A01E
From: "hubicka at ucw dot cz" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug lto/99447] [11 Regression] ICE (segfault) in
 lookup_page_table_entry
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 13:30:00 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: lto
X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: GC, ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: hubicka at ucw dot cz
X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 11.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-99447-4-ZbvDBFLFkb@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-99447-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-99447-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 13:30:00 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D99447

--- Comment #11 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz> ---
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D99447
>=20
> --- Comment #10 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> So like this.
>=20
> diff --git a/gcc/cgraph.c b/gcc/cgraph.c
> index 80140757d16..447d9a920f7 100644
> --- a/gcc/cgraph.c
> +++ b/gcc/cgraph.c
> @@ -1854,6 +1854,9 @@ cgraph_node::release_body (bool keep_arguments)
>       needed to emit debug info later.  */
>    if (!used_as_abstract_origin && DECL_INITIAL (decl))
>      DECL_INITIAL (decl) =3D error_mark_node;
> +  /* Zap references to call stmts of our body.  */
> +  for (cgraph_edge *e =3D callees; e; e =3D e->next_callee)
> +    e->call_stmt =3D NULL;

Looks good but will also need to warlk indirect calls.
However I wonder in what situations it makes sense to release body but
keep cgraph edges?

Honza
>    release_function_body (decl);
>    if (lto_file_data)
>      {
>=20
> --=20
> You are receiving this mail because:
> You are on the CC list for the bug.=