* [PATCH] store-merging: Fix up a -fcompare-debug bug in get_status_for_store_merging [PR104263]
@ 2022-01-28 16:31 Jakub Jelinek
2022-01-28 17:35 ` Jeff Law
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Jakub Jelinek @ 2022-01-28 16:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Biener; +Cc: gcc-patches
Hi!
As mentioned in the PRthe following testcase fails, because the last
stmt of a bb with -g is a debug stmt and get_status_for_store_merging
uses gimple_seq_last_stmt (bb_seq (bb)) when testing if it is valid
for store merging. The debug stmt isn't valid, while a stmt at that
position with -g0 is valid and so the divergence.
As we walk the whole bb already, this patch just remembers the last
non-debug stmt, so that we don't need to skip backwards debug stmts at the
end of the bb to find last real stmt.
Bootstrapped/regtested on powerpc64le-linux, ok for trunk?
2022-01-28 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
PR tree-optimization/104263
* gimple-ssa-store-merging.cc (get_status_for_store_merging): For
cfun->can_throw_non_call_exceptions && cfun->eh test whether
last non-debug stmt in the bb is store_valid_for_store_merging_p
rather than last stmt.
* gcc.dg/pr104263.c: New test.
--- gcc/gimple-ssa-store-merging.cc.jj 2022-01-20 11:30:45.521578942 +0100
+++ gcc/gimple-ssa-store-merging.cc 2022-01-28 11:27:25.437947561 +0100
@@ -5364,6 +5364,7 @@ get_status_for_store_merging (basic_bloc
unsigned int num_constructors = 0;
gimple_stmt_iterator gsi;
edge e;
+ gimple *last_stmt = NULL;
for (gsi = gsi_after_labels (bb); !gsi_end_p (gsi); gsi_next (&gsi))
{
@@ -5372,6 +5373,8 @@ get_status_for_store_merging (basic_bloc
if (is_gimple_debug (stmt))
continue;
+ last_stmt = stmt;
+
if (store_valid_for_store_merging_p (stmt) && ++num_statements >= 2)
break;
@@ -5398,7 +5401,7 @@ get_status_for_store_merging (basic_bloc
return BB_INVALID;
if (cfun->can_throw_non_call_exceptions && cfun->eh
- && store_valid_for_store_merging_p (gimple_seq_last_stmt (bb_seq (bb)))
+ && store_valid_for_store_merging_p (last_stmt)
&& (e = find_fallthru_edge (bb->succs))
&& e->dest == bb->next_bb)
return BB_EXTENDED_VALID;
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr104263.c.jj 2022-01-28 11:32:26.718619588 +0100
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr104263.c 2022-01-28 11:32:04.111944459 +0100
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+/* PR tree-optimization/104263 */
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-options "-O2 -fcompare-debug -fnon-call-exceptions -fno-inline-small-functions" } */
+
+int n;
+
+int
+bar (void)
+{
+ int a;
+
+ n = 0;
+ a = 0;
+
+ return n;
+}
+
+__attribute__ ((pure, returns_twice)) int
+foo (void)
+{
+ n = bar () + 1;
+ foo ();
+
+ return 0;
+}
Jakub
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] store-merging: Fix up a -fcompare-debug bug in get_status_for_store_merging [PR104263]
2022-01-28 16:31 [PATCH] store-merging: Fix up a -fcompare-debug bug in get_status_for_store_merging [PR104263] Jakub Jelinek
@ 2022-01-28 17:35 ` Jeff Law
2022-01-28 18:03 ` Richard Biener
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Jeff Law @ 2022-01-28 17:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jakub Jelinek, Richard Biener; +Cc: gcc-patches
On 1/28/2022 9:31 AM, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Hi!
>
> As mentioned in the PRthe following testcase fails, because the last
> stmt of a bb with -g is a debug stmt and get_status_for_store_merging
> uses gimple_seq_last_stmt (bb_seq (bb)) when testing if it is valid
> for store merging. The debug stmt isn't valid, while a stmt at that
> position with -g0 is valid and so the divergence.
>
> As we walk the whole bb already, this patch just remembers the last
> non-debug stmt, so that we don't need to skip backwards debug stmts at the
> end of the bb to find last real stmt.
>
> Bootstrapped/regtested on powerpc64le-linux, ok for trunk?
>
> 2022-01-28 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
>
> PR tree-optimization/104263
> * gimple-ssa-store-merging.cc (get_status_for_store_merging): For
> cfun->can_throw_non_call_exceptions && cfun->eh test whether
> last non-debug stmt in the bb is store_valid_for_store_merging_p
> rather than last stmt.
>
> * gcc.dg/pr104263.c: New test.
OK
jeff
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] store-merging: Fix up a -fcompare-debug bug in get_status_for_store_merging [PR104263]
2022-01-28 17:35 ` Jeff Law
@ 2022-01-28 18:03 ` Richard Biener
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Richard Biener @ 2022-01-28 18:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff Law; +Cc: Jakub Jelinek, gcc-patches
> Am 28.01.2022 um 18:36 schrieb Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>:
>
>
>
>> On 1/28/2022 9:31 AM, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> As mentioned in the PRthe following testcase fails, because the last
>> stmt of a bb with -g is a debug stmt and get_status_for_store_merging
>> uses gimple_seq_last_stmt (bb_seq (bb)) when testing if it is valid
>> for store merging. The debug stmt isn't valid, while a stmt at that
>> position with -g0 is valid and so the divergence.
>>
>> As we walk the whole bb already, this patch just remembers the last
>> non-debug stmt, so that we don't need to skip backwards debug stmts at the
>> end of the bb to find last real stmt.
>>
>> Bootstrapped/regtested on powerpc64le-linux, ok for trunk
Ok
Thanks,
Richard
>> 2022-01-28 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
>>
>> PR tree-optimization/104263
>> * gimple-ssa-store-merging.cc (get_status_for_store_merging): For
>> cfun->can_throw_non_call_exceptions && cfun->eh test whether
>> last non-debug stmt in the bb is store_valid_for_store_merging_p
>> rather than last stmt.
>>
>> * gcc.dg/pr104263.c: New test.
> OK
> jeff
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-01-28 18:03 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2022-01-28 16:31 [PATCH] store-merging: Fix up a -fcompare-debug bug in get_status_for_store_merging [PR104263] Jakub Jelinek
2022-01-28 17:35 ` Jeff Law
2022-01-28 18:03 ` Richard Biener
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).