From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz (nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz [195.113.20.16]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87C91385782F for ; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 06:45:46 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 87C91385782F Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=ucw.cz Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=hubicka@kam.mff.cuni.cz Received: by nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz (Postfix, from userid 16202) id 15B8F2809CE; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 08:45:45 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2020 08:45:45 +0200 From: Jan Hubicka To: David Malcolm Cc: David =?iso-8859-2?Q?=C8epel=EDk?= , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: New modref/ipa_modref optimization passes Message-ID: <20200922064545.GF91738@kam.mff.cuni.cz> References: <157394261677.27454.2367573047582814412@a285.localdomain> <20200919223255.GA69342@kam.mff.cuni.cz> <20200920173043.GD6758@kam.mff.cuni.cz> <9597b8e20d5b50ad4e501d4506e578107474d55f.camel@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9597b8e20d5b50ad4e501d4506e578107474d55f.camel@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE, TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2020 06:45:48 -0000 > On Sun, 2020-09-20 at 19:30 +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > > On Sun, 2020-09-20 at 00:32 +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > this is cleaned up version of the patch. I removed unfinished > > > > bits, > > > > fixed > > > > propagation, cleaned it up and fixed fallout. > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > While there are several areas for improvements but I think it is > > > > not > > > > in shape > > > > for mainline and rest can be dealt with incrementally. > > > > > > FWIW I think you typoed: > > > "not in shape for mainline" > > > when you meant: > > > "now in shape for mainline" > > > given... > > > > Yep, sorry for that :) > > I've started seeing crashes in the jit testsuite even with trivial > inputs, which are happening at pass_modref::~pass_modref at: > > 772 ggc_delete (summaries); > > on the first in-process iteration of the code, with: > > (gdb) p summaries > $3 = (fast_function_summary *) 0x0 > > I'm still investigating (but may have to call halt for the night), but > this could be an underlying issue with the new passes; the jit > testsuite runs with the equivalent of: > > --param=ggc-min-expand=0 --param=ggc-min-heapsize=0 > > throughout to shake out GC issues (to do a full collection at each GC > opportunity). > > Was this code tested with the jit? Do you see issues in cc1 if you set > those params? Anyone else seeing "random" crashes? I suppose this happes when pass gets constructed but no summary is computed. Dos the NULL pointer guard here help? Honza > > Thanks > Dave > >