public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>
To: Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>, Jan Hubicka <hubicka@ucw.cz>
Cc: Xi Ruoyao <ryxi@stu.xidian.edu.cn>,
	GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
		Florent Hivert <florent.hivert@lri.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Destroy arguments for _Cilk_spawn calling in the child (PR 80038)
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2017 07:05:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFiYyc0TPi_gEA0f8zJU5oUEBPhoTMXUwU9ysG1NeH5+qmKZGg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f2f74bb5-7f36-6306-8b81-de7d87a46a14@redhat.com>

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 11:16 PM, Jeff Law <law@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 04/07/2017 08:02 AM, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
>>
>> On 2017-04-06 11:12 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
>>
>>> With the likely deprecation in mind, I've only done a cursory review of
>>> the changes -- mostly to verify that they hit Cilk+ paths only.
>>
>>
>>> What's the purpose behind changing when we set the in_lto_p flag?
>>
>>
>> Without that change, GCC with my patch ICEed with _Cilk_spawn and
>> -flto -O3 -fcilkplus since __cilkrts_stack_frame.ctx's type (array of void
>> *)
>> was not TYPE_STRUCTURAL_EQUALITY_P in lto stage.
>> If this change is not proper, I'll work on modifying my patch to work
>> without touching in_lto_p.
>
> It's certainly be preferable to not change in_lto_p-- unless Richi wants to
> chime in on the safety of setting in_lto_p earlier.
>
> I'm not familiar enough with the LTO interactions to know if movement of
> in_lto_p is safe.

It should be safe and even technically more correct given we now have
various conditionals in the type building routines in tree.c that check
in_lto_p and avoid setting TYPE_CANONICAL from them -- TYPE_CANONICAL
is re-computed later, and for the builtin types we first zero TYPE_CANONICAL
(see lto.c:read_cgraph_and_symbols).

Now... I think those checks are somewhat wrong given that the middle-end
_does_ create types later, hopefully not ones we use for alias purposes,
but I'm not 100% sure.  So it somewhat feels like a hack ;)

So in theory the change is a good one.  I'm still nervous at this stage.

Did you verify LTO bootstrap still works with the patch?

CCing Honza who fiddled with this last (and introduced all those
in_lto_p checks).

Thanks,
Richard.

> Jeff

  reply	other threads:[~2017-04-13  7:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-03-31 13:58 Xi Ruoyao
2017-04-06 17:12 ` Jeff Law
2017-04-07 14:03   ` Xi Ruoyao
2017-04-12 21:17     ` Jeff Law
2017-04-13  7:05       ` Richard Biener [this message]
2017-04-14  7:00         ` Xi Ruoyao
2017-04-15  4:05           ` Xi Ruoyao
2017-04-25 15:37             ` Jeff Law
2017-04-28 14:51               ` Xi Ruoyao
2017-04-28 15:29                 ` Jeff Law
2017-04-29  8:51                   ` [PATCH v2] " Xi Ruoyao
2017-05-01 22:26                     ` Jeff Law
2017-05-02  7:56                       ` Andreas Schwab
2017-05-02  8:18                         ` Xi Ruoyao
2017-05-02 15:45                           ` Jeff Law
2017-08-21 17:33               ` [PATCH, gcc-7-branch] Backport PR80038 Xi Ruoyao
2017-08-21 17:46                 ` Xi Ruoyao
2017-08-22  9:04                   ` Richard Biener
2017-08-24 13:06                     ` Xi Ruoyao
2017-09-06  4:33                       ` Xi Ruoyao

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=CAFiYyc0TPi_gEA0f8zJU5oUEBPhoTMXUwU9ysG1NeH5+qmKZGg@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=richard.guenther@gmail.com \
    --cc=florent.hivert@lri.fr \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=hubicka@ucw.cz \
    --cc=law@redhat.com \
    --cc=ryxi@stu.xidian.edu.cn \
    /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).