From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-331413-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 8978 invoked by alias); 9 Nov 2012 12:29:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 8956 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Nov 2012 12:29:25 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,KHOP_RCVD_TRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail-pa0-f47.google.com (HELO mail-pa0-f47.google.com) (209.85.220.47)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 09 Nov 2012 12:29:19 +0000
Received: by mail-pa0-f47.google.com with SMTP id fa11so2621380pad.20        for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Fri, 09 Nov 2012 04:29:19 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.66.81.138 with SMTP id a10mr31165536pay.53.1352464158877; Fri, 09 Nov 2012 04:29:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.66.246.232 with HTTP; Fri, 9 Nov 2012 04:29:18 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAK1BsWrRTFUC8EnODa1r94_bkkhP+xgkw15qPTf+z=AXqjtXoA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAFULd4bZR1CxTxyaojj39DMQ0Z6FC=UYCd6QQO7YNck3fcsMXQ@mail.gmail.com>	<CAK1BsWpoD4AVB_4+J6snJgs4BF1Jbiw-RrifvZiiAm21qRURew@mail.gmail.com>	<CAFULd4a8pgcTu-yv=8sm3=KyYxz0SAJW+7+uUmUu9k_YwXxsew@mail.gmail.com>	<CAK1BsWrZyWL8WrczwbTm5djhkqZjbBy0p10wb9-_=HJFA0Z8iA@mail.gmail.com>	<CAFULd4aP_JMxTnSymMe373PJ3WFcR2Bax3BtksBtf-xVQeH=0Q@mail.gmail.com>	<CAK1BsWrsVu4TRW50RW0X7G4RSguSAjhqFPe-tkeXKaurr=sX1A@mail.gmail.com>	<CAFULd4b0y6GGZsn1s4-RXc1mAvZGrhGd4YQBhfLgeMWmv2eXPA@mail.gmail.com>	<CAK1BsWoL5hsfZprf-a8zxG+Bhe9SwGFwqxHxOw9UX+bbsFD5oQ@mail.gmail.com>	<CAFULd4bJXT-nnAk6HCn2C=+jhfiUD-fAe3LK8AYd9jgqQQHvKQ@mail.gmail.com>	<CAFULd4bdxuKbYYS7TcyRfjNukLvJ0d5pOD7zJGAyKEQLPq7z2Q@mail.gmail.com>	<CAK1BsWpL69eRHTD8dzVOm9xtOqtjcr6z3B2tvb_VikWPzKT0Dw@mail.gmail.com>	<CAFULd4YaVLCYF=Huw_kDozTBTcZnGUAy7xOcV+VEweOWZ5Cigg@mail.gmail.com>	<CAFULd4YyRVY4BzD+csZAqCCmB7v3YEwAaOpNW9QsMXEbCkFw+Q@mail.gmail.com>	<CAK1BsWrRTFUC8EnODa1r94_bkkhP+xgkw15qPTf+z=AXqjtXoA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2012 12:29:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAFULd4bw0ma79MtGiKM_4Kt29O32rsME0mW05rnBephE3dxjiQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [off-list] Re: [PATCH] Vzeroupper placement/47440
From: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>
To: Vladimir Yakovlev <vbyakovl23@gmail.com>
Cc: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>, Igor Zamyatin <izamyatin@gmail.com>, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2012-11/txt/msg00735.txt.bz2

On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 1:18 PM, Vladimir Yakovlev <vbyakovl23@gmail.com> wrote:
>> These assert should tell you what is wrong with the control flow.
>> Please look at control_flow_insn_p, which condition returns true.
>
> There is a note after call insn.
>
> (call_insn:TI 908 35558 50534 1681 (call (mem:QI (symbol_ref:DI
> ("_gfortran_stop_string") [flags 0x41] <function_decl 0x7ffff7eb6200
> _gfortran_stop_string>) [0 _gfortran_stop_string S1 A8])
>         (const_int 0 [0])) huygens.fppized.f90:190 616 {*call}
>      (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:DI 5 di)
>         (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:SI 4 si)
>             (expr_list:REG_NORETURN (const_int 0 [0])
>                 (nil))))
>     (expr_list:REG_FRAME_RELATED_EXPR (use (reg:DI 5 di))
>         (expr_list:REG_BR_PRED (use (reg:SI 4 si))
>             (nil))))
> (note 50534 908 909 1681 (expr_list:REG_DEP_TRUE (concat:DI (reg:DI 5 di)
>         (const_int 0 [0]))
>     (expr_list:REG_DEP_TRUE (concat:SI (reg:SI 4 si)
>             (const_int 0 [0]))
>         (nil))) NOTE_INSN_CALL_ARG_LOCATION)
>

Huh, this RTX is ignored:

--cfgrtl.c--
bool
control_flow_insn_p (const_rtx insn)
{
  switch (GET_CODE (insn))
    {
    case NOTE:
    case CODE_LABEL:
    case DEBUG_INSN:
      return false;
--cfgrtl.c--

The problem is noreturn call.

BTW: What happens if the new pass is put before pro_and_epilogue pass?

Uros,