* Fix PR middle-end/44993
@ 2010-07-28 7:53 Eric Botcazou
2010-09-15 7:12 ` H.J. Lu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Eric Botcazou @ 2010-07-28 7:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-patches
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1386 bytes --]
This is the bootstrap failure on SPARC64/Linux introduced by the fix for PR
middle-end/44790, which was a bootstrap failure on IA-64/HP-UX introduced by
the mem-ref2 merge.
The fix introduced a non-canonical expansion for MEM_REF via POINTER_PLUS_EXPR
which bypasses checks for valid addresses in the SPARC back-end:
name = MEM[(struct
exp_ch3__make_predefined_primitive_specs__B_99__stream_op_tss_names___PAD
*)D.14526_1156 + 4294967296B];
is expanded into
sethi %hi(stream_op_tss_names.6060+4294967296), %l2
or %l2, %lo(stream_op_tss_names.6060+4294967296), %l2
which overflows since sethi is a 32-bit operator.
This can very likely happen for other back-ends as well so I think that the
best approach is to fix PR middle-end/44790 more canonically. The problem
was that:
op0 = expand_expr (base, NULL_RTX, address_mode, EXPAND_NORMAL);
assumed that op0 was generated in address_mode; this isn't guaranteed so an
explicit address conversion is required:
op0 = convert_memory_address_addr_space (address_mode, op0, as);
Bootstrapped/regtested on SPARC64/Linux, applied on the mainline as obvious.
2010-07-28 Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou@adacore.com>
PR middle-end/44790
PR middle-end/44993
* expr.c (expand_expr_real_1) <MEM_REF>: Revert latest change. Make
sure the base has address_mode before adding the offset.
--
Eric Botcazou
[-- Attachment #2: pr44993.diff --]
[-- Type: text/x-diff, Size: 980 bytes --]
Index: expr.c
===================================================================
--- expr.c (revision 162566)
+++ expr.c (working copy)
@@ -8730,11 +8730,14 @@ expand_expr_real_1 (tree exp, rtx target
base = build2 (BIT_AND_EXPR, TREE_TYPE (base),
gimple_assign_rhs1 (def_stmt),
gimple_assign_rhs2 (def_stmt));
+ op0 = expand_expr (base, NULL_RTX, VOIDmode, EXPAND_NORMAL);
+ op0 = convert_memory_address_addr_space (address_mode, op0, as);
if (!integer_zerop (TREE_OPERAND (exp, 1)))
- base = build2 (POINTER_PLUS_EXPR, TREE_TYPE (base),
- base, double_int_to_tree (sizetype,
- mem_ref_offset (exp)));
- op0 = expand_expr (base, NULL_RTX, address_mode, EXPAND_SUM);
+ {
+ rtx off
+ = immed_double_int_const (mem_ref_offset (exp), address_mode);
+ op0 = simplify_gen_binary (PLUS, address_mode, op0, off);
+ }
op0 = memory_address_addr_space (mode, op0, as);
temp = gen_rtx_MEM (mode, op0);
set_mem_attributes (temp, exp, 0);
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Fix PR middle-end/44993
2010-07-28 7:53 Fix PR middle-end/44993 Eric Botcazou
@ 2010-09-15 7:12 ` H.J. Lu
2010-09-15 8:10 ` Eric Botcazou
[not found] ` <AANLkTinYK0iAJf0HQbjsGbJ9H+F9KP3pzCkq8yjLA4Bc@mail.gmail.com>
0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: H.J. Lu @ 2010-09-15 7:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eric Botcazou; +Cc: gcc-patches
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 12:44 AM, Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou@adacore.com> wrote:
> This is the bootstrap failure on SPARC64/Linux introduced by the fix for PR
> middle-end/44790, which was a bootstrap failure on IA-64/HP-UX introduced by
> the mem-ref2 merge.
>
> The fix introduced a non-canonical expansion for MEM_REF via POINTER_PLUS_EXPR
> which bypasses checks for valid addresses in the SPARC back-end:
>
> name = MEM[(struct
> exp_ch3__make_predefined_primitive_specs__B_99__stream_op_tss_names___PAD
> *)D.14526_1156 + 4294967296B];
>
> is expanded into
>
> sethi %hi(stream_op_tss_names.6060+4294967296), %l2
> or %l2, %lo(stream_op_tss_names.6060+4294967296), %l2
>
> which overflows since sethi is a 32-bit operator.
>
> This can very likely happen for other back-ends as well so I think that the
> best approach is to fix PR middle-end/44790 more canonically. The problem
> was that:
>
> op0 = expand_expr (base, NULL_RTX, address_mode, EXPAND_NORMAL);
>
> assumed that op0 was generated in address_mode; this isn't guaranteed so an
> explicit address conversion is required:
>
> op0 = convert_memory_address_addr_space (address_mode, op0, as);
>
>
> Bootstrapped/regtested on SPARC64/Linux, applied on the mainline as obvious.
>
>
> 2010-07-28 Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou@adacore.com>
>
> PR middle-end/44790
> PR middle-end/44993
> * expr.c (expand_expr_real_1) <MEM_REF>: Revert latest change. Make
> sure the base has address_mode before adding the offset.
>
This patch caused:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45670
--
H.J.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Fix PR middle-end/44993
2010-09-15 7:12 ` H.J. Lu
@ 2010-09-15 8:10 ` Eric Botcazou
2010-09-15 8:43 ` Andrew Pinski
[not found] ` <AANLkTinYK0iAJf0HQbjsGbJ9H+F9KP3pzCkq8yjLA4Bc@mail.gmail.com>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Eric Botcazou @ 2010-09-15 8:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: H.J. Lu; +Cc: gcc-patches
> This patch caused:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45670
No, it didn't, it cannot cause a code size regression from GCC 4.5 since it
reverted an incorrect change made on trunk only. Start from 161906 please.
--
Eric Botcazou
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Fix PR middle-end/44993
2010-09-15 8:10 ` Eric Botcazou
@ 2010-09-15 8:43 ` Andrew Pinski
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Pinski @ 2010-09-15 8:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eric Botcazou; +Cc: H.J. Lu, gcc-patches
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 10:51 PM, Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou@adacore.com> wrote:
> No, it didn't, it cannot cause a code size regression from GCC 4.5 since it
> reverted an incorrect change made on trunk only. Start from 161906 please.
By the way I noticed iv-opts differences between 4.3 and 4.6. So you
might want to consider IV-opts changes first.
-- Pinski
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Fix PR middle-end/44993
[not found] ` <AANLkTinYK0iAJf0HQbjsGbJ9H+F9KP3pzCkq8yjLA4Bc@mail.gmail.com>
@ 2010-11-02 12:23 ` Eric Botcazou
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Eric Botcazou @ 2010-11-02 12:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: H.J. Lu; +Cc: gcc-patches
> This also caused:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46252
Again, no, it didn't, it cannot cause a regression from GCC 4.5 since it
reverted an incorrect change made on trunk only.
--
Eric Botcazou
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-11-02 11:57 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2010-07-28 7:53 Fix PR middle-end/44993 Eric Botcazou
2010-09-15 7:12 ` H.J. Lu
2010-09-15 8:10 ` Eric Botcazou
2010-09-15 8:43 ` Andrew Pinski
[not found] ` <AANLkTinYK0iAJf0HQbjsGbJ9H+F9KP3pzCkq8yjLA4Bc@mail.gmail.com>
2010-11-02 12:23 ` Eric Botcazou
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).