From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Cc: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] function: Factor out make_*logue_seq
Date: Thu, 19 May 2016 07:28:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160519072815.GA6926@gate.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160519071626.GY28550@tucnak.redhat.com>
On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 09:16:26AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 05:13:25PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 01:35:16PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 11:20:29AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > > > >> > * function.c (make_split_prologue_seq, make_prologue_seq,
> > > > >> > make_epilogue_seq): New functions, factored out from...
> > > > >> > (thread_prologue_and_epilogue_insns): Here.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> It breaks x86:
> > > > >
> > > > > Are you sure it is this patch causing it? As noted, it was tested on x86.
> > > >
> > > > I am pretty sure. How did you test it on x86?
> > >
> > > "make -k check". I'll test 32-bit now.
> >
> > Actually, it also fails on 64 bit. It passed my testing because it does
> > not fail together with patch 3/3, and does not fail on powerpc at all.
>
> If 3/3 isn't approved soon, can you please revert the problematic commit
> until it is if that patch can't work right on its own and needs the other
> patch too)? The trunk is in terrible state right now at least on
> x86_64/i686-linux, various tests hang forever (e.g. some cleanup-* tests)
> and there are hundreds of failures, making it impossible to do proper
> regression testing.
[ You could just revert it locally if it hinders other testing -- I have
to do that all the time for pawtches breaking powerpc ].
The following fixes it, tested on x86_64-linux. Is it okay for trunk?
(It only happens for targets that have a splitter gated by epilogue_done
for their eh_return pattern).
Segher
2016-05-19 Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
* function.c (thread_prologue_and_epilogue_insn): Move the
"goto epilogue_done" one block later.
diff --git a/gcc/function.c b/gcc/function.c
index 1c56253..4c236eb 100644
--- a/gcc/function.c
+++ b/gcc/function.c
@@ -5960,11 +5960,6 @@ thread_prologue_and_epilogue_insns (void)
exit_fallthru_edge = find_fallthru_edge (EXIT_BLOCK_PTR_FOR_FN (cfun)->preds);
- /* If nothing falls through into the exit block, we don't need an
- epilogue. */
- if (exit_fallthru_edge == NULL)
- goto epilogue_done;
-
/* A small fib -- epilogue is not yet completed, but we wish to re-use
this marker for the splits of EH_RETURN patterns, and nothing else
uses the flag in the meantime. */
@@ -5994,6 +5989,11 @@ thread_prologue_and_epilogue_insns (void)
emit_note_after (NOTE_INSN_EPILOGUE_BEG, prev);
}
+ /* If nothing falls through into the exit block, we don't need an
+ epilogue. */
+ if (exit_fallthru_edge == NULL)
+ goto epilogue_done;
+
if (epilogue_seq)
{
insert_insn_on_edge (epilogue_seq, exit_fallthru_edge);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-05-19 7:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-05-17 1:09 [PATCH 1/3] function: Do the CLEANUP_EXPENSIVE after shrink-wrapping, not before Segher Boessenkool
2016-05-17 1:09 ` [PATCH 2/3] function: Factor out make_*logue_seq Segher Boessenkool
2016-05-17 20:35 ` Jeff Law
2016-05-18 17:17 ` H.J. Lu
2016-05-18 18:11 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-05-18 18:20 ` H.J. Lu
2016-05-18 18:24 ` H.J. Lu
2016-05-18 18:35 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-05-18 22:13 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-05-19 7:16 ` Jakub Jelinek
2016-05-19 7:28 ` Segher Boessenkool [this message]
2016-05-19 7:41 ` Jakub Jelinek
2016-05-19 17:20 ` Jeff Law
2016-05-17 1:09 ` [PATCH 3/3] function: Restructure *logue insertion Segher Boessenkool
2016-05-19 8:04 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-05-19 22:00 ` Jeff Law
2016-05-19 22:20 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-05-20 9:28 ` Thomas Schwinge
2016-05-20 13:21 ` Thomas Schwinge
2016-05-20 14:47 ` Nathan Sidwell
2016-05-20 15:35 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-05-20 21:27 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-05-17 8:06 ` [PATCH 1/3] function: Do the CLEANUP_EXPENSIVE after shrink-wrapping, not before Eric Botcazou
2016-05-17 8:47 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-05-17 9:08 ` Eric Botcazou
2016-05-17 9:18 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-05-17 22:23 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-05-17 22:34 ` Eric Botcazou
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=20160519072815.GA6926@gate.crashing.org \
--to=segher@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
/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).