From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [IPv6:2001:67c:2178:6::1d]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 520683858D32 for ; Mon, 16 Jan 2023 12:31:45 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 520683858D32 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.cz Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=suse.cz Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3001160713; Mon, 16 Jan 2023 12:31:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1673872304; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=9dehH0jZd126t42oekkqMrtVsEhffBudASbm8GPUP+c=; b=XLzyZOkLkIbte2rQJ2JBarrsJO+dgfCLtqly5YJbH6s8J4qAp68o1Im3BOH356akpU9LTh z+ONUH+1GcI5fnKiikxyHIE2Hn/5N02dAFfFvhqlCOByhni0baqb9E6drPobphnkXIBc7T 9I3ykaPikAdE2aYv8kpDoHS4HiU9QEk= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1673872304; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=9dehH0jZd126t42oekkqMrtVsEhffBudASbm8GPUP+c=; b=DKUuEakCO01HVP79bb0qvMxAVgTI8f1dVD6wc/sg5CJUtFA/Yk15COR2eZHc1YkEJZ5CLq gU1pM/krOJ9vr7DQ== Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 18235138FE; Mon, 16 Jan 2023 12:31:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id Y13LBLBDxWOCHgAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Mon, 16 Jan 2023 12:31:44 +0000 Message-ID: <9070c8aa-3496-7424-6c4b-33d1e5606b31@suse.cz> Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2023 13:31:43 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.6.1 Subject: Re: [PATCH] IPA: do not release body if still needed Content-Language: en-US To: Jan Hubicka Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Martin Jambor References: From: =?UTF-8?Q?Martin_Li=c5=a1ka?= In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,GIT_PATCH_0,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_SOFTFAIL,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On 1/14/23 22:36, Jan Hubicka wrote: >> Hi. >> >> Noticed during building of libbackend.a with the LTO partial linking. >> >> The function release_body is called even if clone_of is a clone >> of a another function and thus it shares tree declaration. We should >> preserve it in that situation. >> >> Patch can bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu and survives regression tests. >> >> Ready to be installed? >> Thanks, >> Martin >> >> PR ipa/107944 >> >> gcc/ChangeLog: >> >> * cgraph.cc (cgraph_node::remove): Do not release body >> if a node is clone of another node. >> --- >> gcc/cgraph.cc | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/gcc/cgraph.cc b/gcc/cgraph.cc >> index f15cb47c8b8..2e7d77ffd6c 100644 >> --- a/gcc/cgraph.cc >> +++ b/gcc/cgraph.cc >> @@ -1893,7 +1893,7 @@ cgraph_node::remove (void) >> else if (clone_of) >> { >> clone_of->clones = next_sibling_clone; >> - if (!clone_of->analyzed && !clone_of->clones && !clones) >> + if (!clone_of->analyzed && !clone_of->clones && !clones && !clone_of->clone_of) >> clone_of->release_body (); > > It is interesting that the problem reproduced only after almost 20 > years. But I suppose it is because we materialize clones in parituclar > order. Well, it started with r13-48-g27ee75dbe81bb7 where Martin add a new code that calls the release_body function. So it's pretty new. > > I think there are two ways to fix it. Either declare release_body to be > applicable only to the master clone and avoid calling it here (as you > do) or make release_body do nothing when called on a clone. > I guess it makes sense to keep your approach but please add sanity check > to release_body that clone_of == NULL with a comment. I do support Martin's enhanced version of the patch. Cheers, Martin > > OK with that change. > Honza >> } >> if (next_sibling_clone) >> -- >> 2.38.1 >>